linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the staging.current 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:	Sun, 19 Jun 2016 21:17:34 +0100
From:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the
 staging.current tree

On 14/06/16 06:04, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/iio/industrialio-trigger.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   995438233579 ("iio: Fix error handling in iio_trigger_attach_poll_func")
> 
> from the staging.current tree and commit:
> 
>   ef2d71d6b7fb ("iio: triggers: Make trigger ops structure explicitly non optional.")
> 
> from the staging 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.
> 
Thanks Stephen,

Looks great.

Jonathan