linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the scsi-mkp tree with the block 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: <20170426154722.757ba483@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:47:22 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the scsi-mkp tree with the block tree

Hi all,

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

  drivers/scsi/sd.c

between commit:

  81d926e8b552 ("sd: split sd_setup_discard_cmnd")

from the block tree and commit:

  7529fbb0080d ("scsi: sd: Fix function descriptions")

from the scsi-mkp tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the former 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