linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sparc-next tree with the arm64 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>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 5 Apr 2018 10:41:24 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sparc-next tree with the arm64
 tree

Hi all,

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 10:34:08 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the sparc-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/x86/kernel/signal_compat.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   266da65e9156 ("signal: Add FPE_FLTUNK si_code for undiagnosable fp exceptions")
> 
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
> 
>   d84bb709aa4a ("signals, sparc: Add signal codes for ADI violations")
> 
> from the sparc-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.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc arch/x86/kernel/signal_compat.c
> index d2884e951bb5,838a4dc90a6d..000000000000
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal_compat.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal_compat.c
> @@@ -26,8 -26,8 +26,8 @@@ static inline void signal_compat_build_
>   	 * new fields are handled in copy_siginfo_to_user32()!
>   	 */
>   	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGILL  != 11);
>  -	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGFPE  != 13);
>  +	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGFPE  != 14);
> - 	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGSEGV != 4);
> + 	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGSEGV != 7);
>   	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGBUS  != 5);
>   	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGTRAP != 4);
>   	BUILD_BUG_ON(NSIGCHLD != 6);

This is now a conflict between the adm64 tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped