linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170807114033.4d484e6c@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 7 Aug 2017 11:40:33 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree

Hi Rafael,

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

  drivers/acpi/sbs.c

between commit:

  f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")

from the dmi tree and commit:

  630b3aff8a51 ("treewide: Consolidate Apple DMI checks")

from the pm tree.

I fixed it up (the latter removed the declaration updated by the former)
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