linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 19 Dec 2018 15:12:52 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Marc Orr <marcorr@...gle.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree

Hi all,

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

  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c

between commit:

  eb012ef3b4e3 ("x86: Remove Intel MPX")

from the tip tree and commit:

  b666a4b69739 ("kvm: x86: Dynamically allocate guest_fpu")

from the kvm tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed some code updated by the latter, so I
did that) 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