[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180815131246.67214bdf@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 13:12:46 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the crypto tree with the net-next
tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:22:53 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the crypto tree got conflicts in:
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c
> drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fs_enet/mac-fec.c
>
> between commits:
>
> 16f6e9835bcd ("net: ethernet: freescale: Use generic CRC32 implementation")
> d805f6a86829 ("net: ethernet: fs-enet: Use generic CRC32 implementation")
>
> from the net-next tree and commit:
>
> 5d258b48efbd ("net: ethernet: Use existing define with polynomial")
>
> from the crypto tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I used the net-next tree versions (but kept the rmeoval
> of the CRC32_POLY and FEC_CRC_POLY defines) 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.
This is now a conflict between the crypto-current tree and the net-next
tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists