linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the pidfd 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 28 Jan 2021 10:04:46 +0800
From:   Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Next Mailing List" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the pidfd
 tree

Hi:
On 2021/1/27 19:43, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   2f221d6f7b88 ("attr: handle idmapped mounts")
> 
> from the pidfd tree and commit:
> 
>   57d3629b7a9a ("hugetlbfs: remove useless BUG_ON(!inode) in hugetlbfs_setattr()")
> 
> from the akpm-current 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.
> 

This fix is what I want. Many thanks for doing this.