linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-x86 tree with the origin 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: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 16:09:55 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, 
	Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-x86 tree with the origin tree

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-x86 tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   f3ced000a2df5 ("KVM: x86: Always sync PIR to IRR prior to scanning I/O APIC routes")
> 
> from the origin tree and commit:
> 
>   aebed32e4985a ("KVM: x86: Introduce kvm_x86_call() to simplify static calls of kvm_x86_ops")
> 
> from the kvm-x86 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.

Thanks for the heads up!  This (and possibily similar conflicts in the future)
is expected.  I'll rebase kvm-x86/static_calls next week to resolve the conflict
in kvm-x86/next.