linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit 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>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHC9VhTg01RvbUAK6th6aYJuiyZFj4eoavHktyrsaEPfCuuJUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:39:04 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with Linus' tree

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the audit tree got a conflict in:
>
>   net/netfilter/xt_AUDIT.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   613dbd95723a ("netfilter: x_tables: move hook state into xt_action_param structure")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
>   36fe46d172e5 ("audit: normalize NETFILTER_PKT")
>
> from the audit tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>
> P.S. You may want to consider a newer base for your tree ...

FWIW, the audit/next tree's base is old-ish for a reason; it is that
way out of awkwardness and not neglect.  Depending on how things go
today/this-weekend there are some audit patches in the queue which
will require a rebase to a much more current point in time (likely a
4.11-rcX tag, which presents its own challenges, but oh well).

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com