linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160720121018.4b84b4cc@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:10:18 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:

  net/sctp/input.c

between commit:

  c74bfbdba0e8 ("sctp: load transport header after sk_filter")

from the net tree and commit:

  3acb50c18d8d ("sctp: delay as much as possible skb_linearize")

from the net-next tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the net-next version) 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