linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with the drm-misc 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210204155846.5aef94a8@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Thu, 4 Feb 2021 15:58:46 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Mark Gross <mark.gross@...el.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Patrik Jakobsson <patrik.r.jakobsson@...il.com>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drivers-x86 tree with the drm-misc
 tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drivers-x86 tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/Kconfig
  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/mdfld_device.c
  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/mdfld_dsi_output.c
  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/mdfld_output.c
  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/tc35876x-dsi-lvds.c

between commits:

  b51035c200bd ("drm/gma500: Remove Medfield support")
  837f23bb4b60 ("drm/gma500: Drop DRM_GMA3600 config option")

from the drm-misc tree and commit:

  bfc838f8598e ("drm/gma500: Convert to use new SCU IPC API")
  25ded39ad064 ("drm/gma500: Get rid of duplicate NULL checks")

from the drivers-x86 tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the text that was updated by the
latter and removed the last 4 files) 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