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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 13:01:21 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the staging tree with the staging.current tree On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 09:14:58AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 13:02:12 +1000 > Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the staging tree got a conflict in: > > > > drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 20ea39ef9f2f ("iio: Fix scan mask selection") > > > > from the staging.current tree and commit: > > > > 3862828a903d ("iio: buffer: Switch to bitmap_zalloc()") > > > > from the staging tree. > > > > I fixed it up (I just used the staging tree version) 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. > > > Thanks Stephen, > > That is the correct resolution. I think it still misses the following fix: diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c b/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c index 3c7e7380d1c3..9c2d0c97ed24 100644 --- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c +++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-buffer.c @@ -320,7 +320,7 @@ static int iio_scan_mask_set(struct iio_dev *indio_dev, const unsigned long *mask; unsigned long *trialmask; - trialmask = bitmap_alloc(indio_dev->masklength, GFP_KERNEL); + trialmask = bitmap_zalloc(indio_dev->masklength, GFP_KERNEL); if (trialmask == NULL) return -ENOMEM; if (!indio_dev->masklength) { -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists