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: Fri, 10 May 2024 18:08:30 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	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 gpio-brgl tree with the
 gpio-brgl-fixes tree

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 05:10:49PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:08:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 May 2024 08:33:37 +0200 Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks! I will send the fixes upstream today and then pull v6.9 into
> > > my tree before the merge window PR to fix this conflict.  
> > 
> > Or you could just merge your for-current branch into your for-next
> > branch and avoid possible issues with all the rest of v6.9 ...
> 
> Or, since it is a pretty simple conflict, just do not merge and just
> mention the conflict to Linus in your merge window PR.

I also would go the latest suggestion.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ