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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 15 May 2019 21:53:05 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with Linus' tree

On Thu, 16 May 2019 11:05:48 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the ftrace tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/linux/compiler.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   37686b1353cf ("tracing: Improve "if" macro code generation")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   a15fd609ad53 ("tracing: Simplify "if" macro code")
> 
> from the ftrace tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just used the latter version) 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.
> 

Hi Stephen,

I mentioned this conflict and the entry_64.S one to Linus when
submitting my pull request. I fixed it up too in my ftrace/conflicts
branch.

Thanks!

-- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists