[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250711144229.0f65529a@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 14:42:29 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>, "Jason A. Donenfeld"
<Jason@...c4.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc: 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>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the libcrypto tree with the
libcrypto-fixes tree
Hi all,
On Tue, 1 Jul 2025 12:30:36 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the libcrypto tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/s390/crypto/sha512_s390.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 400bd45ba798 ("crypto: s390/sha - Fix uninitialized variable in SHA-1 and SHA-2")
The above is now commit
68279380266a ("crypto: s390/sha - Fix uninitialized variable in SHA-1 and SHA-2")
in Linus' tree.
> from the libcrypto-fixes tree and commit:
>
> b7b366087e0f ("lib/crypto: s390/sha512: Migrate optimized SHA-512 code to library")
>
> from the libcrypto tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just deleted the file) 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists