linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pci 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170629001439.GB21758@lst.de>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jun 2017 02:14:39 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michael Hernandez <michael.hernandez@...ium.com>,
        Himanshu Madhani <himanshu.madhani@...ium.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pci tree

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 01:15:34PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 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.

The merge looks fine to me.