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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220912130344.2e635cd5@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 12 Sep 2022 13:03:44 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the battery tree with the i2c tree

Hi all,

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

  drivers/power/supply/cw2015_battery.c

between commit:

  ed5c2f5fd10d ("i2c: Make remove callback return void")

from the i2c tree and commit:

  ed5c2f5fd10d ("i2c: Make remove callback return void")

from the battery tree.

I fixed it up (the latter removed the code modified by the former, so
I just did that) 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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ