linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the crypto 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:47:44 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paulo Flabiano Smorigo <pfsmorigo@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the crypto tree

Hi all,

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

  MAINTAINERS

between commit:

  c97e4df573f2 ("MAINTAINERS: change NX/VMX maintainers")

from the crypto tree and commit:

  1dfddcdb95c4 ("MAINTAINERS: Update from @linux.vnet.ibm.com to @linux.ibm.com")

from the rcu tree.

I fixed it up (I used the crypto tree version of teh changes) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped