linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] KVM changes for 4.8 merge window

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

Message-Id: <20160802173647.2bc6f36f@mschwide>
Date:	Tue, 2 Aug 2016 17:36:47 -0400
From:	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
	KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] KVM changes for 4.8 merge window

On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:17:39 -0400
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > No, I don't use the merge from linux-next directly. I just re-generate
> > the merge myself, and if the pull request then includes a merge
> > resolution (either as just a verbal description, or a patch or by
> > having a separate "merged" test-branch), I will compare my merge with
> > that one.
> 
> Ok, the KVM merge was indeed the most painful one this merge window so
> far. Which isn't saying all that much, since this merge window has so
> far been pretty good (knock wood).
> 
> Let's see if I got everything right. I did pick up the fixup patch
> from Sudip and made it part of the merge, so that hopefully it's all
> complete and also bisectable.
> 
> Please do check it out. And let's hope the KVM people have learnt
> their lesson and we won't have these messy merges in the future.

I included my try to fixup the expected merge conflict between the
KVM tree and the s390 tree at the end of the first please-merge email
for s390. Dunno if you have noticed this, the merge result looks good
to me.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.