linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with Linus' 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]

Message-ID: <CADnq5_Mx1b16sbJH2Y_XfD9GiYvuGtwZyxRa_1u151aZbZEyHA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 16:24:46 -0400
From: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>
To: Tobias Jakobi <tjakobi@...h.uni-bielefeld.de>, 
	"Wentland, Harry" <Harry.Wentland@....com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, 
	Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>, Jerry Zuo <jerry.zuo@....com>, 
	DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>, 
	Sung Joon Kim <sungjoon.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with Linus' tree

+ Harry

On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 8:58 AM Tobias Jakobi
<tjakobi@...h.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
>
> On 9/16/24 06:15, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >    drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/hwss/dcn35/dcn35_hwseq.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >    e835d5144f5e ("drm/amd/display: Avoid race between dcn35_set_drr() and dc_state_destruct()")
> >
> > from Linus' tree and commit:
> >
> >    be7a6a517164 ("drm/amd/display: Check stream pointer is initialized before accessing")
> >
> > from the drm 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.
> >
> On close inspection it might be worthwhile to take the same precautions
> that we now take with tg, also with pipe_ctx[i]->stream.
>
> @Alex: What do you think?

@Wentland, Harry can stream be NULL here?

Alex

>
> With best wishes,
> Tobias
>