linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the kspp 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200106154805.40c26d2e@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 6 Jan 2020 15:48:05 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the kspp tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the kspp tree got a conflict in:

  tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c

between commit:

  e4ab5ccc357b ("selftests/seccomp: Catch garbage on SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_RECV")

from Linus' tree and commit:

  589f6c054d7a ("selftests/seccomp: Catch garbage on SECCOMP_IOCTL_NOTIF_RECV")

from the kspp tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the version from Linus' tree as that seems
to have been committed later) 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

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped