linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the mm tree with the kspp 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 30 Aug 2022 17:00:51 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        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 mm tree with the kspp tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mm tree got a conflict in:

  lib/Makefile

between commit:

  5e3ad11bfc5a ("testing/selftests: Add tests for the is_signed_type() macro")

from the kspp tree and commit:

  7a2791666971 ("testing/selftests: add tests for the is_signed_type() macro")

from the mm tree.

I fixed it up (I dropped the latter commit by using the former version
of this file and deleting lib/is_signed_type_test.c) 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