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]
Date:   Tue, 17 Oct 2023 12:30:17 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Christoffer Dall <cdall@...columbia.edu>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the arm64 tree

Hi all,

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

  arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c

between commit:

  d8569fba1385 ("arm64: kvm: Use cpus_have_final_cap() explicitly")

from the arm64 tree and commit:

  ef150908b6bd ("KVM: arm64: Add generic check for system-supported vCPU features")

from the kvm-arm tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the latter) 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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists