linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20160429084928.GB32074@arm.com>
Date:	Fri, 29 Apr 2016 09:49:29 +0100
From:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
	AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
	james.morse@....com
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 tree with Linus' tree

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 09:59:58AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   06a71a24bae5 ("arm64: KVM: unregister notifiers in hyp mode teardown path")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   67f691976662 ("arm64: kvm: allows kvm cpu hotplug")
> 
> from the arm64 tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> index dded1b763c16,1687e1450c3a..000000000000
> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> @@@ -1198,8 -1226,6 +1233,7 @@@ static void teardown_hyp_mode(void
>   	free_hyp_pgds();
>   	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
>   		free_page(per_cpu(kvm_arm_hyp_stack_page, cpu));
> - 	unregister_cpu_notifier(&hyp_init_cpu_nb);
>  +	hyp_cpu_pm_exit();
>   }
>   
>   static int init_vhe_mode(void)

Thanks Stephen, this looks good to me.

Will