linux-kernel - Re: linux-next build conflict between modules and metag trees (LOCKDEP_NOW

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <51148A28.4030307@synopsys.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:46:24 +0530
From:	Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To:	James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>
CC:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: linux-next build conflict between modules and metag trees (LOCKDEP_NOW_UNRELIABLE)

On Thursday 07 February 2013 04:46 PM, James Hogan wrote:
> 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
> 

Being in the same situation as metag (ARC Port), what's the recommended practice
here - do we simply cherry-pick these changes into our tree - or do we merge the
"other" tree on top - ofcourse with premise that "other" tree will not rebase.

Thx,
-Vineet
--
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/