lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 3 Jun 2015 14:04:40 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <>
To:	Darren Hart <>
Cc:	Philippe Coval <>,,,
	Dmitry Tunin <>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with Linus'

Hi Darren,

On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 20:27:50 -0700 Darren Hart <> wrote:
> Thanks for the heads' up. This happens because my -next branch is based on *-rc1
> as I think was recommended at the last kernel summit. Since rc1 I sent Linus the
> G50-30, but by rc6 I didn't feel good about sending the similar G50-30 fix, so
> that is in my rc1 branch.
> I am happy to rebase my -next on rc6 to avoid the conflict, but I believe the
> rebase is considered poor practice.

This is a fairly trivial conflict and Linus will have no trouble fixing
it up as well when he merges your tree in the next window

> You said no action required, but if there is something I can do to avoid this
> kind of manual effort on your part (and a manual merge by Linus in the upcoming
> merge window), I'm happy to update my process to accommodate.

This is fine.  git rerere remembers these conflict resolutions for me,
so I only have to fix them once (usually).

For a more complex conflict, you might consider merging the branch that
you had Linus merge (or a later -rc) with, of course, a nice
explanation in the merge commit message, but in this case that would be

Stephen Rothwell          

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists