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  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:   Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:37:47 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the
 risc-v tree

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 08:21:07PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   lib/Makefile
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   527701eda5f1 ("lib: Add a generic version of devmem_is_allowed()")
> 
> from the risc-v tree and commits:
> 
>   8250e121c672 ("lib/list_kunit: follow new file name convention for KUnit tests")
>   17bf776cf09a ("lib/linear_ranges_kunit: follow new file name convention for KUnit tests")
>   23fa4e39ee62 ("lib/bits_kunit: follow new file name convention for KUnit tests")
>   1987f84faec6 ("lib/cmdline_kunit: add a new test suite for cmdline API")
> 
> from the akpm-current 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.

Looks good enough (*) to me, thanks!

*) I think we might group that new line with an existing one(s) of the same
level (GENERIC_LIB) but it doesn't really matter.

> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc lib/Makefile
> index bcedd691ef63,dc623561ef9d..000000000000
> --- a/lib/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/Makefile
> @@@ -350,8 -350,7 +350,9 @@@ obj-$(CONFIG_PLDMFW) += pldmfw
>   
>   # KUnit tests
>   obj-$(CONFIG_BITFIELD_KUNIT) += bitfield_kunit.o
> - obj-$(CONFIG_LIST_KUNIT_TEST) += list-test.o
> - obj-$(CONFIG_LINEAR_RANGES_TEST) += test_linear_ranges.o
> - obj-$(CONFIG_BITS_TEST) += test_bits.o
> + obj-$(CONFIG_BITS_TEST) += bits_kunit.o
> + obj-$(CONFIG_CMDLINE_KUNIT_TEST) += cmdline_kunit.o
> + obj-$(CONFIG_LINEAR_RANGES_TEST) += linear_ranges_kunit.o
> + obj-$(CONFIG_LIST_KUNIT_TEST) += list_kunit.o
>  +
>  +obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_LIB_DEVMEM_IS_ALLOWED) += devmem_is_allowed.o



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


Powered by blists - more mailing lists