linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the battery tree with the i2c 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

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