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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 31 Jul 2017 13:50:29 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the tip tree

Hi Paul,

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

  arch/x86/mm/tlb.c

between commit:

  94b1b03b519b ("x86/mm: Rework lazy TLB mode and TLB freshness tracking")

from the tip tree and commit:

  d7713e8f8b23 ("membarrier: Expedited private command")

from the rcu tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the comment and the load_cr3(), so I
just dropped the commend change in the latter) 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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ