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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sat, 23 May 2020 08:06:14 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <>,
        Stephen Rothwell <>,
        Will Deacon <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 11:54:26AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Borislav Petkov <> writes:
> > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 05:12:23PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> Marco, Thomas, is there any better setup I can provide Stephen?  Or
> >> is the next-20200519 -rcu tree the best we have right now?
> >
> > I've queued the fixes yesterday into tip:locking/kcsan and tglx said
> > something about you having to rebase anyway. I guess you can find him on
> > IRC at some point later. :)
> locking/kcsan is not the problem (it just has more fixes on top)
> core/rcu is the one which diverged and caused the merge conflict with
> PPC to happen twice. So Paul needs to remove the stale core/rcu bits and
> rebase on the current version (which is not going to change again).

So there will be another noinstr-rcu-* tag, and I will rebase on top
of that, correct?  If so, fair enough!

							Thanx, Paul

Powered by blists - more mailing lists