linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arc-current tree with Linus' 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]

Date:   Tue, 14 Aug 2018 23:00:27 +0000
From:   Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
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>,
        Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@...opsys.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arc-current tree with Linus'
 tree

On 08/14/2018 03:11 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Vineet,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the arc-current tree got a conflict in:
>
>   arch/arc/include/asm/atomic.h
>
> between commit:
>
>   ab0b910490fe ("atomics/arc: Define atomic64_fetch_add_unless()")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
>   39456148db74 ("ARC: atomic64: fix atomic64_add_unless function")
>
> from the arc-current tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the version from Linus' tree for now) 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.

Thx for the report Stephen. I've dropped my patch for now, let the dust settle and
then we can add it.

Thx,
-Vineet