linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the kbuild 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-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20191127073111.1e3e2c75@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Wed, 27 Nov 2019 07:31:11 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitrii Dolgov <9erthalion6@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the kbuild tree

Hi all,

On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 11:53:09 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/Kbuild
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   fcbb8461fd23 ("kbuild: remove header compile test")
> 
> from the kbuild tree and commit:
> 
>   c826bd7a743f ("io_uring: add set of tracing events")
> 
> from the block tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just removed the file) 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.

This is now a conflict between the kbuild tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped