linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 00/10] Support for Cortex-M Prototyping System

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

Message-ID: <20160414093945.GA15250@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:39:45 +0200
From:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:	Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@....com>
Cc:	arnd@...db.de, linux@....linux.org.uk, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	tglx@...utronix.de, liviu.dudau@....com, sudeep.holla@....com,
	lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, mark.rutland@....com,
	gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, peter@...leysoftware.com,
	pawel.moll@....com, ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
	robh+dt@...nel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/10] Support for Cortex-M Prototyping System

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 09:47:57AM +0100, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 01/04/16 15:02, Vladimir Murzin wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > This patch series provides the basic support for running ucLinux on V2M-MPS2
> > platform.
> > 
> > With these patches applied ucLinux can be run on both HW and FVP models
> > with Cortex-M3/M4/M7 configurations.
> 
> Any objection to get it merged?
> 
> Sudeep Holla noticed that there is merge conflict against linux-next
> with PIC32 uart (Makefile and serial_core.h), so should I provide
> conflict resolution or do rebase on someone's branch?
> 
> Anyway, I'd be glad to know how it should be processed further?

This patchset should go through the arm-soc tree. Any conflicts resulting
from a merge *after* your patchset is in the arm-soc tree is no longer your
problem.

So IOW, if your patchset applies to arm-soc and Arnd is ok to pick it, then
everything is fine.

  -- Daniel