linux-kernel - Re: 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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 11:29:30 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        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>,
        mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rcu tree with the crypto tree

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 03:47:44PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 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.

Agreed, and again adding Ingo.

The author of the conflicting commit is on CC of my commit, FYI.

							Thanx, Paul