linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] EDAC updates for 4.2

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce 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]

Message-ID: <20150624085425.GC32642@pd.tnic>
Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:54:25 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-edac <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>, x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] EDAC updates for 4.2

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:50:38AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> One of the solution I use for cross tree dependencies is:
> 
>     - Apply the commits which create a dependency to a seperate branch
> 
>     - Let the depending tree pull that branch
> 
>     - Merge the branch into the proper tip/ branch

Yeah, in hindsight, we probably should've simply routed all the changes
to amd_mce_inj (the error injection module which depends on the tip
changes) straight through tip/x86/ras and wouldn't have any issues. Oh
well, I'll know that now for the future.

So I'll wait out to hear what Linus prefers and do that.

Thanks guys.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/