linux-kernel - Re: 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 29 Jul 2019 10:31:33 +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: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the
 kspp-gustavo tree

Hi all,

On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 11:03:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> 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")

This is now commit

  2defb94edb44 (""drm/i915: Mark expected switch fall-throughs")

from Linus' tree.

> 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 equivalent 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