linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Some fixes for v5.11

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: <20201215093324.ep7uawi6zlf7etqh@wittgenstein>
Date:   Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:33:24 +0100
From:   Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Some fixes for v5.11

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 03:37:51PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Linus,
> 
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 16:45:50 -0800 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 5:27 AM Christian Brauner
> > <christian.brauner@...ntu.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > /* Conflicts */
> > > At the time of creating this PR no merge conflicts were reported from
> > > linux-next and no merge conflict with 2c85ebc57b3e ("Linux 5.10") when
> > > pulling the tag.  
> > 
> > Really? It conflicted with your own time namespace fixes.. Was one or
> > the other not in linux-next?
> > 
> > Not that the conflicts were big or bad (free_time_ns() prototype
> > changed right next to timens_on_fork() prototype), I'm just surprised
> > you saw no conflicts..
> 
> The time namespace changes appear in linux-next for the first time
> today - where I reported that 3 of them have no Signed-off-by from their
> committer :-(.

This was my bad. I'm adding a script to verify that all commits are
signed-off by me when I commit them.

Christian