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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 09:45:51 -0600 From: Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org> To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org, Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm64 tree with the qcom tree On 6 February 2017 at 05:44, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 10:23:29AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got conflicts in: >> >> arch/arm/kernel/armksyms.c >> arch/arm64/kernel/arm64ksyms.c >> arch/arm64/kernel/smccc-call.S >> include/linux/arm-smccc.h >> >> between commits: >> >> 0a0c5b832751 ("arm: kernel: Add SMC structure parameter") >> 9c96e7f72029 ("firmware: qcom: scm: Fix interrupted SCM calls") >> >> from the qcom tree and commits: >> >> 680a0873e193 ("arm: kernel: Add SMC structure parameter") >> 82bcd087029f ("firmware: qcom: scm: Fix interrupted SCM calls") >> >> from the arm64 tree. >> >> I fixed it up (please check the final resolution when it is released, >> or fix these up) 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, although if looks like you've resolved the conflict to > be what is in the qcom tree, which is in fact an earlier version of this > patch series. > > Andy, please can you drop your stuff from -next now that a newer version > is queued via arm64? (and also please check that you're happy with what > I've got queued). Done. And looking at your for-next/core, what you have is correct. Regards, Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists