linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with the tip 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: <20191127200022.4e90beb8@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Wed, 27 Nov 2019 20:00:22 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>,
        Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with the tip tree

On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 11:47:04 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 15:10:40 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the ftrace tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   kernel/trace/trace_export.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   60fdad00827c ("ftrace: Rework event_create_dir()")
> > 
> > from the tip tree and commit:
> > 
> >   6dff4d7dd3e0 ("tracing: Make internal ftrace events static")
> > 
> > from the ftrace 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 kernel/trace/trace_export.c
> > index 6d64c1c19fd5,2e6d2e9741cc..000000000000
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_export.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_export.c
> > @@@ -142,10 -168,12 +142,10 @@@ static struct trace_event_fields ftrace
> >   #define F_printk(fmt, args...) __stringify(fmt) ", "  __stringify(args)
> >   
> >   #undef FTRACE_ENTRY_REG
> >  -#define FTRACE_ENTRY_REG(call, struct_name, etype, tstruct, print, filter,\
> >  -			 regfn)						\
> >  -									\
> >  +#define FTRACE_ENTRY_REG(call, struct_name, etype, tstruct, print, regfn) \
> > - struct trace_event_class __refdata event_class_ftrace_##call = {	\
> > + static struct trace_event_class __refdata event_class_ftrace_##call = {	\
> >   	.system			= __stringify(TRACE_SYSTEM),		\
> >  -	.define_fields		= ftrace_define_fields_##call,		\
> >  +	.fields_array		= ftrace_event_fields_##call,		\
> >   	.fields			= LIST_HEAD_INIT(event_class_ftrace_##call.fields),\
> >   	.reg			= regfn,				\
> >   };									\  
> 
> This is now a conflict between the tip tree and Linus' tree.

This looks to be a trivial conflict, as the change in the ftrace (now
Linus's) tree just makes event_class_ftrace_##call static, and
shouldn't interfere with the changes in tip.

-- Steve