linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the tip 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: <0c99fb26-f741-2377-930e-f192e39d855c@suse.cz>
Date:   Wed, 23 Aug 2017 08:39:51 +0200
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        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>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the tip
 tree

On 08/22/2017 08:57 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Andrew,

Hi,

> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   init/main.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   caba4cbbd27d ("debugobjects: Make kmemleak ignore debug objects")
> 
> from the tip tree and commit:
> 
>   50a7dc046b58 ("mm, page_ext: move page_ext_init() after page_alloc_init_late()")

This patch can be also dropped from mmotm. It was a RFC and review
suggested a different approach which I didn't get to try yet. (The other
patches in the series should be fine to stay in any case).

> from the akpm-current tree.
> 
> 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.
>