From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mimi Zohar Subject: Re: Transferring applied X.509 patches from crypto/next to security/next Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 16:25:57 -0500 Message-ID: <1454966757.3037.41.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20160206142705.GA23978@gondor.apana.org.au> <20160206074731.GF22220@gondor.apana.org.au> <20160202180848.2887.9937.stgit@tstruk-mobl1> <11215.1454752821@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <25680.1454939914@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Herbert Xu , jmorris@namei.org, Tadeusz Struk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: David Howells Return-path: Received: from e28smtp08.in.ibm.com ([125.16.236.8]:40863 "EHLO e28smtp08.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755478AbcBHV0N (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2016 16:26:13 -0500 Received: from localhost by e28smtp08.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 02:56:08 +0530 In-Reply-To: <25680.1454939914@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Herbert, On Mon, 2016-02-08 at 13:58 +0000, David Howells wrote: > Herbert Xu wrote: > > > > Hmmm... That means that the crypto branch and the security branch are going > > > to conflict. > > > > I thought you were OK with it going in now as you said that you'll > > fix it up later. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Do you want me to > > revert? > > If you can back them out, I'll apply them to my keys-next branch. Unless > James is willing to rebase security/next on top of your crypto branch? Could we upstream these patches via James' tree? If you re-base these patches on top of the James' security-next branch and send him a pull request, we can then base on our patches on top of them. Mimi