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  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:   Mon, 20 Feb 2017 10:01:03 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kspp tree with the net-next tree

On 02/20/2017 12:56 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Kees,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kspp tree got a conflict in:
>
>    include/linux/filter.h
>
> between commit:
>
>    74451e66d516 ("bpf: make jited programs visible in traces")
>
> from the net-next tree and commit:
>
>    0f5bf6d0afe4 ("arch: Rename CONFIG_DEBUG_RODATA and CONFIG_DEBUG_MODULE_RONX")
>
> from the kspp 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.

Looks good thanks!

Powered by blists - more mailing lists