linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the btrfs 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: <20231024082543.575b3edd@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2023 08:25:43 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <brauner@...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 vfs-brauner tree with the btrfs
 tree

Hi David,

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 19:55:13 +0200 David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz> wrote:
>
> I have updated my for-next branch again, sorry (top commit 1a4dc97c883a4f763cbaf50).
> There are some fixes I don't want to miss from the 6.7 pull request.
> There should be minimal change to the VFS tree conflict resolution so
> the diff should be reusable.

So, why did you not just merge in v6.6-rc7 (or better yet, the branch
that contains the fix(es) that Linus merged) and then apply your new
commits on top of that?  All the commits that were in the btrfs tree
have been rebased unchanged.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped