linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Btrfs for 4.13

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: <CA+55aFwFWYtivrNgayV2nhpjv780eWMGRyJA=YwRia6-zvZb_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jul 2017 16:45:49 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
        linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Btrfs for 4.13

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 8:19 AM, David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com> wrote:
>
> There are conflicts with the recently merged block layer branch, the
> resolutions are a bit tedious but still straightforward. Stephen sent a mail
> about that [1]. You can find my merge at for-4.13-part1-merged, there might be
> some whitespace formatting differences but the result is the same.

Ouch, yeah, that was annoying. And yes, I ended up with several
whitespace differences but other than that it looks the same. Oh well.

Jens, Christoph, let's not do that stupid thing with status-vs-error
ever again, ok?

               Linus