linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with Linus' tree

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160330113214.4110cd63@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 11:32:14 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with Linus' tree

Hi Paul,

Today's linux-next merge of the rcu tree got a conflict in:

  kernel/rcu/tree.c

between commit:

  abedf8e2419f ("rcu: Use simple wait queues where possible in rcutree")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  08cace5914ea ("DIAGS: Crude exploratory hack")

from the rcu tree.

I fixed it up (I used the rcu tree version) and can carry the fix as
necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider
cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
particularly complex conflicts.

I really don't think that that rcu tree patch should be in linux-next,
right?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell