Looks good. It builds and seems to work in my testing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve French" <smfre...@gmail.com>
To: "Stephen Rothwell" <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: "CIFS" <linux-c...@vger.kernel.org>, "Linux-Next Mailing List"
<linux-n...@vger.kernel.org>, "Linux Kernel Mailing List"
<email@example.com>, "Kees Cook" <keesc...@chromium.org>, "Ronnie
Sahlberg" <lsahl...@redhat.com>, "Aurelien Aptel" <aap...@suse.com>
Sent: Thursday, 14 June, 2018 10:40:43 AM
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the cifs tree with Linus' tree
I fixed up that patch and repushed to cifs-2.6.git for-next. Seems
trivial. Let me know if any issues.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
> Today's linux-next merge of the cifs tree got a conflict in:
> between commit:
> 6da2ec56059c ("treewide: kmalloc() -> kmalloc_array()")
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 1560d69e21c6 ("cifs: push rfc1002 generation down the stack")
> from the cifs tree.
> I fixed it up (the latter removed the code modified by the former) 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.
> Stephen Rothwell
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html