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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 13 Dec 2021 19:14:34 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     broonie@...nel.org, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm tree with the tip tree

On 12/13/21 18:46, broonie@...nel.org wrote:
> 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.
> 
> diff --cc arch/arm64/kvm/Makefile
> index 0bcc378b79615,04a53f71a6b63..0000000000000
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/Makefile
> @@@ -10,9 -10,7 +10,7 @@@ include $(srctree)/virt/kvm/Makefile.kv
>    obj-$(CONFIG_KVM) += kvm.o
>    obj-$(CONFIG_KVM) += hyp/
>    
> - kvm-y := $(KVM)/kvm_main.o $(KVM)/coalesced_mmio.o $(KVM)/eventfd.o \
> - 	 $(KVM)/vfio.o $(KVM)/irqchip.o $(KVM)/binary_stats.o \
> - 	 arm.o mmu.o mmio.o psci.o hypercalls.o pvtime.o \
>   -kvm-y += arm.o mmu.o mmio.o psci.o perf.o hypercalls.o pvtime.o \
> ++kvm-y := arm.o mmu.o mmio.o psci.o hypercalls.o pvtime.o \

This is mostly okay, but it needs to be "+=" instead of ":=".

Paolo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ