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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190228070408.GA27446@kroah.com> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 08:04:08 +0100 From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.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>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the net-next tree On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 03:52:01PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/staging/fsl-dpaa2/ethsw/ethsw.c > > between commit: > > 570b68c8ddde ("staging: fsl-dpaa2: ethsw: Handle SWITCHDEV_PORT_ATTR_SET") > > from the net-next tree and commit: > > 11f27765f611 ("staging: fsl-dpaa2: ethsw: Add missing netdevice check") > > from the staging tree. > > I fixed it up (the former is a superset of the latter) 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. Looks good to me, thanks! greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists