linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the modules 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230227095331.70887930@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:53:31 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     Edward Humes <aurxenon@...os.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the modules tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

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

  arch/alpha/kernel/module.c

between commit:

  b6b17a8b3ecd ("alpha: fix R_ALPHA_LITERAL reloc for large modules")

from the origin tree and commit:

  a76b092b5655 ("module: replace module_layout with module_memory")

from the modules tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the code modificed by the latter) 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