linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nolibc tree with the vfs-brauner 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]

Message-ID: <26bc62c7-32c7-4ef1-b8d1-77738fa98598@t-8ch.de>
Date:   Thu, 24 Aug 2023 10:33:40 +0200
From:   Thomas Weißschuh <thomas@...ch.de>
To:     Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Zhangjin Wu <falcon@...ylab.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nolibc tree with the vfs-brauner
 tree

On 2023-08-24 09:36:58+0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > You mentioned before that you plan to have this series in
> > -next for some time. If you only submit it to Linux for 6.7 or later
> 
> I'm not sure what this is about. v6.6 was always the plan.

I'm referring to "In any case, this needs long soaking in -next." [0]

Which I interpreted as "longer than usual", where "usual" would have
been v6.6.

Anyways Linus should also be able to resolve the conflict for v6.6 with
a small hint in the PR.

[0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230713-schwalben-anproben-6af2eac149fd@brauner/