linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the scsi-mkp 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: <20171207211017.GU7829@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 Dec 2017 13:10:17 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>,
        "josh@...htriplett.org" <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "ptikhomirov@...tuozzo.com" <ptikhomirov@...tuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the scsi-mkp tree

On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 07:34:39AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 09:40:38 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 05:30:03PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > However, what's not clear to me is through which tree this patch should be
> > > sent to Linus? Should the above patch be sent as a v4.15-rc fix or should
> > > Martin perhaps queue it in his tree for v4.16-rc1?  
> > 
> > I have to defer to you guys on that one.  Left to myself, I will just
> > push it into the next merge window (as opposed to using my normal process,
> > which at this point would get it into the one following).
> > 
> > So please let me know how you would like to proceed.
> 
> Clearly, it needs to go via Martin's tree as otherwise his tree will
> not build in some circumstances ... or if it going to cause problems
> for Paul, then it should be in a separate non-rebasing branch (probably
> of Paul's tree) that is merged into Pauls main branch and Marin's tree.

It is unlikely to cause problems, so please let it go up where convenient.

Just please let me know.

							Thanx, Paul