linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm 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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160601085258.GP27249@flint.armlinux.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 1 Jun 2016 09:52:58 +0100
From:	Russell King <rmk@...linux.org.uk>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mark Yao <mark.yao@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm tree with Linus' tree

On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 10:07:46AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 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.

That wasn't intentional - I guess the "component" branch got included
in for-next when I rebuilt that branch.

The conflict has been around for a while (it's a conflict between code
merged during the merge window, and my changes) and it will get cleaned
up when I rebase my development onto -rc1.

Thanks anyway.

-- 
Russell King
ARM architecture Linux Kernel maintainer