linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with the mm 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]

Message-ID: <20230405140852.04a808e5@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Wed, 5 Apr 2023 14:08:52 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the slab tree with the mm tree

Hi all,

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

  mm/slob.c

between commit:

  3fb083757df1 ("mm: vmscan: refactor updating reclaimed pages in reclaim_state")

from the mm tree and commit:

  6630e950d532 ("mm/slob: remove slob.c")

from the slab tree.

I fixed it up (I just removed the file) 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