linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the asm-generic 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZQenotf1QIHxovor@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date:   Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:28:02 +0800
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        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 asm-generic tree with the mm tree

On 09/18/23 at 10:10am, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the asm-generic tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/ia64/kernel/setup.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   52f40d9a3c11 ("crash_core: change the prototype of function parse_crashkernel()")

Thanks a lot for fixing the conflict. I rebased the crash_core
refactoring code on linus's tree, so didn't notice ia64 arch has been
removed in next tree.

> 
> from the mm tree and commit:
> 
>   cf8e8658100d ("arch: Remove Itanium (IA-64) architecture")
> 
> from the asm-generic tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I 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