linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi-mkp tree with the char-misc 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <47b500d6-0700-812f-dda3-44a14014b66e@sandisk.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:49:14 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi-mkp tree with the char-misc
 tree

On 04/06/2017 10:33 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi-mkp tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   ac1ddc584e98 ("scsi: utilize new cdev_device_add helper function")
> 
> from the char-misc tree and commit:
> 
>   c02465fa13b6 ("scsi: osd_uld: Check scsi_device_get() return value")
> 
> from the scsi-mkp tree.
> 
> I am not sure how to resolve this, so I have just effectively recerted
> the latter commit fo today.  Better suggestions welcome.
> 
> I fixed it 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.

(+linux-scsi)

Hello Martin,

Sorry that I had not yet noticed Logan's patch series. Should my two
patches that conflict with Logan's patch series be dropped and reworked
after Logan's patches are upstream?

Thanks,

Bart.