linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the userns 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: <20200709175751.7adc70b0@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:57:51 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the userns
 tree

Hi all,

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

  fs/exec.c

between commit:

  25cf336de51b ("exec: Remove do_execve_file")

from the userns tree and commit:

  538d50d50815 ("umh: fix refcount underflow in fork_usermode_blob().")

from the akpm-current tree.

I fixed it up (I effectively dropped the akpm-current tree patch since
the former commit means that "file" is no longer passed the affected
function) 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