linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the kspp-gustavo 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]

Message-ID: <20190723110331.1967d000@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jul 2019 11:03:31 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Imre Deak <imre.deak@...el.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the
 kspp-gustavo tree

Hi all,

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

  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp.c

between commit:

  b6ac32eac063 ("drm/i915: Mark expected switch fall-throughs")

from the kspp-gustavo tree and commit:

  bc85328ff431 ("drm/i915: Move the TypeC port handling code to a separate file")
  4f36afb26cbe ("drm/i915: Sanitize the TypeC FIA lane configuration decoding")

from the drm-intel tree.

I fixed it up (bc85328ff431 moved the function updated by b6ac32eac063
and 4f36afb26cbe added an equivalt fixup) 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