linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with the tip 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]

Message-ID: <YjEbAo2126TjKNeE@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 15 Mar 2022 16:02:26 -0700
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Zhen Ni <nizhen@...ontech.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sysctl tree with the tip tree

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 08:02:15AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Luis,
> 
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 13:17:43 -0700 Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 08:18:40PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the sysctl tree got a conflict in:
> > > 
> > >   kernel/sched/deadline.c
> > > 
> > > between commit:
> > > 
> > >   eb77cf1c151c ("sched/deadline: Remove unused def_dl_bandwidth")
> > > 
> > > from the tip tree and commit:
> > > 
> > >   ebb891f03580 ("sched: Move deadline_period sysctls to deadline.c")
> > > 
> > > from the sysctl tree.  
> > 
> > Peter,
> > 
> > to help avoid conflicts I spinned up a sysctl-next tree to collect
> > different cleanups going on kernel/sysctl.c. I can drop 
> > ebb891f03580 ("sched: Move deadline_period sysctls to deadline.c")
> > but I think we'd still run into conflicts as other sysctls are
> > trimmed out. Would you be OK in me taking in eb77cf1c151c
> > ("sched/deadline: Remove unused def_dl_bandwidth") to avoid this
> > conflict?
> 
> Its really a trivial conflict and just needs to be mentioned to Linus
> in the pull requests.

Ah alrighty! Thanks!

  Luis