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]
Date:   Mon, 1 Apr 2019 18:15:04 +0000
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
To:     "sfr@...b.auug.org.au" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Huy Nguyen <huyn@...lanox.com>,
        "linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree

On Mon, 2019-04-01 at 09:11 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/port_buffer.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   e28408e98bce ("net/mlx5e: Update xon formula")
> 
> from the net tree and commit:
> 
>   d3669ca9ff33 ("net/mlx5e: Fix port buffer function documentation
> format")
> 
> 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.
> 

Thanks Stephen, the resolution looks good,
Dave was already notified about this.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists