netdev - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rdma tree with the net 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: <20180115122411.GA15760@mtr-leonro.local>
Date:   Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:24:11 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
        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>,
        Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Eugenia Emantayev <eugenia@...lanox.com>,
        Mark Bloch <markb@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rdma tree with the net tree

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:53:21AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the rdma tree got a conflict in:
>
>   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
>
> between commits:
>
>   8978cc921fc7 ("{net,ib}/mlx5: Don't disable local loopback multicast traffic when needed")
>   72f36be06138 ("net/mlx5: Fix mlx5_get_uars_page to return error code")
>
> from the net tree and commits:
>
>   16c1975f1032 ("IB/mlx5: Create profile infrastructure to add and remove stages")
>   c8b8992446a9 ("IB/mlx5: Move loopback initialization to the corresponding stage")
>
> from the rdma 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.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>

Thanks, Stephen.
It looks right to me.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)