linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm 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: <42820878-9c1d-27df-f299-1de3ed8f65a1@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 18:59:33 +0200
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:     Collin Walling <walling@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvms390 tree with the kvm tree



On 15.07.20 18:25, Collin Walling wrote:
> On 7/13/20 12:50 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the kvms390 tree got a conflict in:
>>
>>   include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>>   1aa561b1a4c0 ("kvm: x86: Add "last CPU" to some KVM_EXIT information")
>>
>> from the kvm tree and commit:
>>
>>   23a60f834406 ("s390/kvm: diagnose 0x318 sync and reset")
>>
>> from the kvms390 tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>>
> 
> Much appreciated. This change is acceptable and should be properly
> reflected in a header sync for QEMU (which I believe just copies the
> files from the kernel?)
> 
> Thanks for the update.
Yes, we will take care of the final number when merging in Paolos tree.