linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfio tree with the kvms390 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: <0f498561-4bd3-3247-4ef4-796dc15cdaf3@de.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jul 2022 10:00:20 +0200
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfio tree with the kvms390 tree

Am 11.07.22 um 09:13 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Betreff:
> linux-next: manual merge of the vfio tree with the kvms390 tree
> Von:
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Datum:
> 11.07.22, 09:13
> 
> An:
> Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@...ux.ibm.com>
> Kopie (CC):
> Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>    include/linux/vfio_pci_core.h
> 
> between commits:
> 
>    b6a7066f4e9b ("vfio/pci: introduce CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM")
>    6518ebc68c72 ("vfio-pci/zdev: add open/close device hooks")
> 
> from the kvms390 tree and commit:
> 
>    d1877e639bc6 ("vfio: de-extern-ify function prototypes")
> 
> from the vfio tree.
> 
> 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.
> 

Alex, Paolo,

I do have a topic branch that we could merge, but I think the conflict is trivial enough for the time being.