linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the dma-mapping 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: <20180117161843.GA14823@lst.de>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jan 2018 17:18:43 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the
        dma-mapping tree

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 01:38:17PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> from the dma-mapping tree and commit:
> 
>   e80a0af4759a ("lib/scatterlist: Introduce sgl_alloc() and sgl_free()")
> 
> from the block 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, the trivial fix look good.