linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250305153436.2426e22c@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 15:34:36 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Christoffer Dall <cdall@...columbia.edu>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next
 Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Oliver Upton
 <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in:

  arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c

between commit:

  fa808ed4e199 ("KVM: arm64: Ensure a VMID is allocated before programming VTTBR_EL2")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  4b1b97f0d7cf ("KVM: arm64: nv: Handle L2->L1 transition on interrupt injection")

from the kvm-arm tree.

I fixed it up (I used the former - the latter just updated the comment
removed by the former) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped