linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vhost 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 10:42:44 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin"
 <mst@...hat.com>, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>, Linux Kernel
 Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vhost tree with the mm tree

On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 22:03:17 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 10:21:55 +0200 David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Easy header conflict. @MST, @Andrew, do we simply want to take that
> > virtio-mem patch via the MM tree to get rid of the conflict
> > completely?
> 
> And because it is so trivial a conflict, you should just mention it to
> Linus when you send the merge requests.

Yes, let's leave things as they are.  We have to give Linus *something*
to do ;)