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:   Thu, 18 Oct 2018 08:16:46 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kselftest tree with the kvm tree

On 10/18/2018 04:51 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 18/10/2018 06:50, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Shuah,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the kselftest tree got a conflict in:
>>
>>   tools/testing/selftests/kvm/dirty_log_test.c
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>>   fff8dcd7b4a2 ("kvm: selftests: port dirty_log_test to aarch64")
>>
>> from the kvm tree and commit:
>>
>>   cda94d9ffa0e ("selftests: kvm: Fix -Wformat warnings")
>>
>> from the kselftest tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>>
> 
> 
> Shuah, I think it's best if in the future the
> tools/testing/selftests/kvm/ changes go through my tree, unless they
> affect many selftests subdirectories.
> 

Yes. That makes sense. Looked like an harmless patch that might not have
any dependencies. Should have checked with you.

Thanks for taking care of the problem.

thanks,
-- Shuah

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ