linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the file-locks 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: <4feec680-6d4f-abbe-c025-61b462612dde@kernel.dk>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2017 20:01:56 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the file-locks
 tree

On 06/27/2017 07:57 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/linux/fs.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   3f64df8a51ce ("fs: new infrastructure for writeback error handling and reporting")
> 
> from the file-locks tree and commit:
> 
>   c75b1d9421f8 ("fs: add fcntl() interface for setting/getting write life time hints")
> 
> from the block tree.

Looks like we stole the same hole! Let's just merge it like this, then
post merge I (or Jeff) can move the member to a better location.

-- 
Jens Axboe