linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the pidfd 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: <20190712135421.GG92297@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Jul 2019 09:54:21 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the pidfd
 tree

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 03:02:36PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 08:53:04AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 12:01:14PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 15 May 2019 13:16:29 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> > > > 
> > > >   include/linux/pid.h
> > > > 
> > > > between commit:
> > > > 
> > > >   51f1b521a515 ("pidfd: add polling support")
> > > > 
> > > > from the pidfd tree and commit:
> > > > 
> > > >   c02e28a1bb18 ("kernel/pid.c: convert struct pid:count to refcount_t")
> > > > 
> > > > from the akpm-current 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.
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Stephen Rothwell
> > > > 
> > > > diff --cc include/linux/pid.h
> > > > index 1484db6ca8d1,0be5829ddd80..000000000000
> > > > --- a/include/linux/pid.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/pid.h
> > > > @@@ -3,7 -3,7 +3,8 @@@
> > > >   #define _LINUX_PID_H
> > > >   
> > > >   #include <linux/rculist.h>
> > > >  +#include <linux/wait.h>
> > > > + #include <linux/refcount.h>
> > > >   
> > > >   enum pid_type
> > > >   {
> > > 
> > > I am still getting this conflict (the commits have changed).  Just a
> > > reminder in case you think Linus may need to know.
> > 
> > Could you let me know if this trivial header inclusion conflict has been
> > resolved now? Let me know what else I can do to help.
> 
> I've informed Linus about this conflict when I sent the PR and he has
> pulled the tag which includes your polling changes. So it shouldn't
> require you to do anything since the conflict is pretty trivial. :)

Thank you Christian!

- Joel