linux-kernel - RE: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the staging.current 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2017 10:00:12 +0000
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
To:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Xingyu Chen <xingyu.chen@...ogic.com>,
        Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
Subject: RE: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the
 staging.current tree



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@...ah.com]
> Sent: 04 December 2017 09:10
> To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>; Linux Kernel Mailing
> List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; Xingyu Chen <xingyu.chen@...ogic.com>;
> Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>; Martin Blumenstingl
> <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the
> staging.current tree
> 
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 12:50:45PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   drivers/iio/adc/meson_saradc.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   d85eed9f5763 ("iio: adc: meson-saradc: initialize the bandgap correctly on
> older SoCs")
> >
> > from the staging.current tree and commit:
> >
> >   930df4d853a8 ("iio: adc: meson-saradc: remove irrelevant clock "sana"")
> >
> > from the staging 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.
> 
> Thanks for the notification, merge looks correct to me, Jonathan?
> 
> greg k-h

Looks right to me. Sorry about that - I should have noticed this one!

Thanks Stephen,

Jonathan