[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jKVnDhu5sv+K+W=AWg0BqtTfoK9=1m6u-0dpDxP9ow74Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 19:18:55 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with Linus' tree
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 7:14 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 184d47f0fd36 ("x86/mm: Avoid VLA in pgd_alloc()")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 1be3f247c288 ("x86/mm: Avoid VLA in pgd_alloc()")
>
> from the tip tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I used the version from Linus' tree) 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.
Ingo, it looks like that commit needs to be split up again ... Linus's
tree still needs the fix for the fix?
-Kees
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists