linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the gpio 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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 30 Apr 2016 13:20:43 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the gpio tree

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
>
>   arch/cris/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
>   f518abf00d50 ("cris: do away with ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB")
>
> from the gpio tree and commit:
>
>   11eaeaeaa756 ("exit_thread: remove empty bodies")
>
> from the akpm-current tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.

Thanks!

> 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.

Hm I have the ACK of the CRIS maintainer on the patch to the
GPIO tree, is the left hand not aware what the right hand is doing :D

Anyway: this conflict looks very trivial so I believe Torvalds will
deal with it without problems.

Yours,
Linus Walleij