linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the set

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]

Date:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 17:44:35 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the set_fs tree with the pm tree

Hi all,

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

  drivers/acpi/battery.c

between commit:

  8830280a69dd ("ACPI: procfs: Remove last dirs after being marked deprecated for a decade")

from the pm tree and commit:

  598d0996ea31 ("proc: switch over direct seq_read method calls to seq_read_iter")

from the set_fs tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the code modified by the latter, so
I just did that) 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