linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the net tree with Linus' 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:   Thu, 8 Dec 2022 08:23:01 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the net tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

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

  drivers/net/xen-netback/rx.c

between commit:

  74e7e1efdad4 ("xen/netback: don't call kfree_skb() with interrupts disabled")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  9e6246518592 ("xen/netback: don't call kfree_skb() under spin_lock_irqsave()")

from the net tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the version from Linus' tree) 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