linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with the drm-intel-fixes 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2023 14:44:53 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with the
 drm-intel-fixes tree

On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 01:03:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   5bc4b43d5c6c ("drm/i915: Fix up locking around dumping requests lists")
> 
> from the drm-intel-fixes tree and commit:
> 
>   4d70c74659d9 ("i915: Move list_count() to list.h as list_count_nodes() for broader use")
> 
> from the usb tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (the former removed the code changed by the latter)

Hmm... Currently I see that 20230127002842.3169194-4-John.C.Harrison@...el.com
moves the code to the drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c.

Is there any new series beside the above mentioned that touches that file and
actually _removes_ that code?

>	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.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko