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

Message-ID: <58388a65-5084-42c6-aa2d-a4b1c5af0ab7@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 12:05:52 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 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 23.04.24 11:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 10:21:55AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 23.04.24 06:59, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the vhost tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>     drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>>     c22e503ced5b ("fix missing vmalloc.h includes")
>>>
>>> from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:
>>>
>>>     4ba509048975 ("virtio-mem: support suspend+resume")
>>>
>>> from the vhost tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>>>
>>
>> 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?
> 
> ok by me:
> 
> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> 
> Andrew if you pick this let me know pls and I will drop it.

@Andrew, the relevant patch is

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20240318120645.105664-1-david@redhat.com/

I could resend, putting you on CC. Whatever you prefer.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb