linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the keys tree with the crypto 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: <20160413120321.396226c2@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Wed, 13 Apr 2016 12:03:21 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the keys tree with the crypto tree

Hi David,

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

  crypto/asymmetric_keys/pkcs7_parser.c

between commit:

  06af9b0f4949 ("PKCS#7: fix missing break on OID_sha224 case")

from the crypto tree and commit:

  566a117a8b24 ("PKCS#7: Make the signature a pointer rather than embedding it")

from the keys tree.

I fixed it up (the latter added the same "break" statement) 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