linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the y2038 tree with the overlayfs 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]

Date:   Fri, 15 Jun 2018 09:44:53 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the y2038 tree with the overlayfs tree

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 4:41 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is now a conflict between the overlayfs tree and Linus' tree.  (I
> restarted my merging after I noticed that Linus merged more stuff.)

Right, I had mentioned this in my pull request message to Linus. Until
yesterday, I had the conflict resolution against the overlayfs and NFS
trees in my y2038 tree and was waiting for both to get merged first
so I could send the pull request. NFS got merged earlier this week,
and when I looked at the mail thread about overlayfs, I concluded that
it wouldn't make it: the changes in the overlayfs tree in linux-next
are the version that got Nak'ed earlier, and the discussion about
trying to fix it ended without a positive conclusion.

This should be addressed as soon as Miklos rebases his changes on
top of 4.18-rc1 for the following merge window.

     Arnd