linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 2 Jun 2020 19:30:48 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi all,

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

  kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c

between commit:

  b36e62eb8521 ("bpf: Use strncpy_from_unsafe_strict() in bpf_seq_printf() helper")

from the net-next tree and patch:

  "bpf:bpf_seq_printf(): handle potentially unsafe format string better"

from the akpm tree.

I fixed it up (I just dropped the akpm tree patch (and its fix) for now)
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