linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the security tree with Linus' 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 21 Aug 2019 13:09:57 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Bohac <jbohac@...e.cz>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the security tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the security tree got a conflict in:

  arch/s390/configs/performance_defconfig

between commit:

  d1523a8f4b8b ("s390: replace defconfig with performance_defconfig")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  99d5cadfde2b ("kexec_file: split KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG into KEXEC_SIG and KEXEC_SIG_FORCE")

from the security tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed this file) 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

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped