linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree with the wireless-drivers 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:   Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:38:11 +0300
From:   Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        Wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Haim Dreyfuss <haim.dreyfuss@...el.com>,
        Shaul Triebitz <shaul.triebitz@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree with
 the wireless-drivers tree

On Thu, 2018-04-26 at 11:09 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the wireless-drivers-next tree got a
> conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-nvm-parse.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   77e30e10ee28 ("iwlwifi: mvm: query regdb for wmm rule if needed")
> 
> from the wireless-drivers tree and commits:
> 
>   9c4f7d512740 ("iwlwifi: move all NVM parsing code to the common
> files")
>   4c625c564ba2 ("iwlwifi: get rid of fw/nvm.c")
> 
> from the wireless-drivers-next 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 resolving this, Stephen!

I checked your resolution and it's spot on.

--
Cheers,
Luca.