[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z_TDwj7cxauy0gQu@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2025 08:35:46 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Linux Crypto List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the crypto tree
* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/Kconfig.assembler
>
> between commits:
>
> 984f835009d6 ("crypto: x86 - Remove CONFIG_AS_SHA1_NI")
> d032a27e8fe9 ("crypto: x86 - Remove CONFIG_AS_SHA256_NI")
>
> from the crypto tree and commit:
>
> a72d55dc3bd6 ("x86/idle: Remove CONFIG_AS_TPAUSE")
>
> from the tip 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.
The resolution looks good to me, thank you!
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists