linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the ipsec-next 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]

Message-Id: <20130213190753.c45ff38dbf502eec735bd1d5@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Wed, 13 Feb 2013 19:07:53 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the ipsec-next tree

Hi Andrew,

Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in
net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c between commit 7cb8a93968e3 ("xfrm: Allow
inserting policies with matching mark and different priorities") from the
ipsec-next tree and commit "hlist: drop the node parameter from
iterators" from the akpm tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

diff --cc net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
index 5b47180,33fe9ee..0000000
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
@@@ -628,16 -612,17 +627,16 @@@ int xfrm_policy_insert(int dir, struct 
  	struct xfrm_policy *pol;
  	struct xfrm_policy *delpol;
  	struct hlist_head *chain;
- 	struct hlist_node *entry, *newpos;
+ 	struct hlist_node *newpos;
 -	u32 mark = policy->mark.v & policy->mark.m;
  
  	write_lock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
  	chain = policy_hash_bysel(net, &policy->selector, policy->family, dir);
  	delpol = NULL;
  	newpos = NULL;
- 	hlist_for_each_entry(pol, entry, chain, bydst) {
+ 	hlist_for_each_entry(pol, chain, bydst) {
  		if (pol->type == policy->type &&
  		    !selector_cmp(&pol->selector, &policy->selector) &&
 -		    (mark & pol->mark.m) == pol->mark.v &&
 +		    xfrm_policy_mark_match(policy, pol) &&
  		    xfrm_sec_ctx_match(pol->security, policy->security) &&
  		    !WARN_ON(delpol)) {
  			if (excl) {

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped