linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the jc

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]

Message-ID: <20181008083228.33ec7c1d@lwn.net>
Date:   Mon, 8 Oct 2018 08:32:28 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the jc_docs tree

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 10:38:29 +0200
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:

> > I can do the renaming and add the patch
> > 
> >   "memory-hotplug.txt: add some details about locking internals"
> > 
> > on top of the jc_docs tree.
> > 
> > Does it sound Ok?
> >   
> 
> Fine with me.

Works for me too.

Andrew, what is your preference for mm docs patches going forward?  It
seems we should try to focus them on one tree or the other.  My preference
would be to keep carrying them to avoid conflicts elsewhere, but I can
certainly direct them youward if you'd rather they went that way.

Thanks,

jon