linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio-brgl tree with the usb 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACMJSesS-faA0VLTbX-8szNQCkYCX2WvzyW93jb3P_ttzULCLw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Oct 2023 08:46:28 +0200
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Wentong Wu <wentong.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio-brgl tree with the usb tree

On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 04:42, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the gpio-brgl tree got a conflict in:
>
>   drivers/gpio/gpio-ljca.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   1034cc423f1b ("gpio: update Intel LJCA USB GPIO driver")
>
> from the usb tree and commit:
>
>   da2ad5fe2292 ("gpio: ljca: Convert to platform remove callback returning void")
>
> from the gpio-brgl tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the former version) 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

Looks good, the latter patch converts the driver to using the
auxiliary bus whose .remove() already returns void.

Bart