linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the wberr 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: <1501585159.4702.0.camel@poochiereds.net>
Date:   Tue, 01 Aug 2017 06:59:19 -0400
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
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 akpm tree with the wberr tree

On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 15:46 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/linux/fs.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   9dcc0577f2a4 ("mm: remove optimizations based on i_size in mapping writeback waits")
> 
> from the wberr tree and patch:
> 
>   "mm: remove optimizations based on i_size in mapping writeback waits"
> 
> from the akpm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just dropped the akpm tree patch) 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.
> 

I didn't realize that Andrew was going to pick that one up. I'll drop it
from my tree.

Thanks!
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>