linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the xarray tree with the nvdimm 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 21 Aug 2018 11:49:24 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the xarray tree with the nvdimm tree

Hi Matthew,

Today's linux-next merge of the xarray tree got a conflict in:

  mm/memory-failure.c

between commit:

  6100e34b2526 ("mm, memory_failure: Teach memory_failure() about dev_pagemap pages")

from the nvdimm tree and commit:

  0c2b437d7e2b ("mm, memory_failure: Teach memory_failure() about dev_pagemap pages")

from the xarray tree.

I fixed it up (the former looks like an updated version (after Linus'
"review", so I used that version) 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.

I guess the xarray tree needs to be rebased on the changes in the
nvdimm tree.  :-(

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped