linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace 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: <20241021222236.3670ab79@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 22:22:36 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with Linus' tree

On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:26:36 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the ftrace tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   09661f75e75c ("ring-buffer: Fix reader locking when changing the sub buffer order")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   1f1c2bc9d075 ("ring-buffer: Limit time with disabled interrupts in rb_check_pages()")
> 
> from the ftrace 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, but I screwed up my ring-buffer branch. I have a new one
tested, and I'll be rebasing it today.

-- Steve