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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 08:44:20 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sparc-next tree with the dma-mapping tree On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 09:30:42AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the sparc-next tree got a conflict in: > > arch/sparc/kernel/ioport.c > > between commit: > > 53b7670e5735 ("sparc: factor the dma coherent mapping into helper") > > from the dma-mapping tree and commit: > > 86ef771ed543 ("sparc: Use DT node full_name instead of name for resources") > > from the sparc-next tree. Dave, Sam: should I just apply a version of Rob's tree that takes the refactoring into account to the dma-mapping tree? That way we should get the right result independent of the merge order.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists