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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200512183419.5b61fde0@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 12 May 2020 18:34:19 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the notifications tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

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

  fs/io_uring.c

between commit:

  2fb3e82284fc ("io_uring: punt splice async because of inode mutex")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  317f078cce34 ("pipe: Add general notification queue support")

from the notifications tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the code modified by the latter) 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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ