linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with Linus' 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]

Date:   Tue, 14 Sep 2021 20:47:30 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with Linus' tree

On Wed, 15 Sep 2021 10:44:44 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the ftrace tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   lib/bootconfig.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   77e02cf57b6c ("memblock: introduce saner 'memblock_free_ptr()' interface")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   6c7324bca2ec ("bootconfig: Fix to check the xbc_node is used before free it")
> 
> from the ftrace tree.
> 
> The new memblock_free_ptr() inroduced by Linus' tree copes with NULL
> pointers, so I just used that.  Which means that the ftrace tree patch
> will be redundant.
> 
> I fixed it up (see above) 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.
> 

No need. Linus had issues with the commit in my tree and did his own fix
instead, which is what is conflicting. Let me go and remove those commits
from my for-next branch.

-- Steve