linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tty tree with the powerpc 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87sf8auw7s.fsf@mail.lhotse>
Date:   Wed, 23 Aug 2023 16:08:39 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        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 tty tree with the powerpc tree

Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 02:58:26PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Today's linux-next merge of the tty tree got a conflict in:
>> 
>>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/fs_pd.h
>> 
>> between commits:
>> 
>>   e6e077cb2aa4 ("powerpc/include: Declare mpc8xx_immr in 8xx_immap.h")
>>   fecc436a97af ("powerpc/include: Remove mpc8260.h and m82xx_pci.h")
>>   fbbf4280dae4 ("powerpc/8xx: Remove immr_map() and immr_unmap()")
>>   7768716d2f19 ("powerpc/cpm2: Remove cpm2_map() and cpm2_unmap()")
>> 
>> from the powerpc tree and commit:
>> 
>>   c2d6c1b4f034 ("serial: cpm_uart: Use get_baudrate() instead of uart_baudrate()")
>> 
>> from the tty tree.
>> 
>> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>> 
>> Note that after all the above are applied, it looks like this file can
>> be removed completely as nothing in the tree includes it any more.
>
> Thanks for the notice, I'll let the ppc developers remove it as it's in
> their tree.

Ack.

cheers