linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the leds tree with Linus' 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: <20200409131252.2dfde0b7@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:12:52 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marek Behún <marek.behun@....cz>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the leds tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

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

  drivers/leds/Makefile

between commit:

  457386350e6a ("leds: sort Makefile entries")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  3953d1908b2c ("From: Marek Behún <marek.behun@....cz>")
  53cb3df9dd2d ("Sort Makefile entries to reduce risk of rejects.")

from the leds tree.

I fixed it up (I 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.

BTW, commit 3953d1908b2c clearly did not get applied correctly :-(

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped