linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the fscache 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20211006100502.78cff1c7@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Wed, 6 Oct 2021 10:05:02 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the fscache tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the fscache tree got conflicts in:

  fs/9p/cache.c
  fs/9p/vfs_addr.c

between commit:

  bc868036569e ("9p: Fix a bunch of kerneldoc warnings shown up by W=1")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  fcd4c99b70ce ("9p: Convert to using the netfs helper lib to do reads and caching")

from the fscache tree.

I fixed it up (I used the latter versions) 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