netdev - linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next 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]

Date:   Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:51:00 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Emil S Tantilov <emils.tantilov@...il.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew,

Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:

  net/ipv6/route.c

between commit:

  6802f3adcb3f ("ipv6: Fix build with gcc-4.4.5")

from the net-next tree and patch:

  "net/ipv6/route.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 anon union initializer issue"

from the akpm tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the net-next tree version) 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