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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sun, 6 Aug 2017 22:21:43 -0400
From:   Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree

On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 10:01 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>   net/ipv4/tcp_output.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   a2815817ffa6 ("tcp: enable xmit timer fix by having TLP use time when RTO should fire")
>
> from the net tree and commit:
>
>   bb4d991a28cc ("tcp: adjust tail loss probe timeout")
>
> from the net-next 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.

Sorry about that. Will try to follow that procedure in the future.

thanks,
neal

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ