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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:16:12 +0000
From:	James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: linux-next build conflict between modules and metag trees (LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE)

Hi Rusty,

The metag architecture tree adds an add_taint(TAINT_DIE) like other
architectures do, and the modules-next tree adds the
LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE flag to all uses of add_taint (but obviously
misses arch/metag since it doesn't exist yet), causing a compile error
on metag in -next when the two are merged together.

Is it okay for me to merge your commit 373d4d0 ("taint: add explicit
flag to show whether lock dep is still OK.") in modules-next into the
base of the metag tree and expect it not to be rebased, so that I can
then squash the fix into the metag tree?

The only commits this would include are:
$ git log --oneline linus/master..373d4d0
373d4d0 taint: add explicit flag to show whether lock dep is still OK.
64748a2 module: printk message when module signature fail taints kernel.

Thanks
James

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ