linux-kernel - Re: 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 01 Sep 2017 15:20:21 +0200
From:   Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the dmi tree

Hi Stephen,

On jeu., 2017-08-31 at 11:07 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/acpi/blacklist.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   f996c4155d0d ("dmi: Mark all struct dmi_system_id instances const")
> 
> from the dmi tree and commit:
> 
>   5aa5911a0ed9 ("ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()")
> 
> from the pm tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This

Below, where?

> 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.

-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support