linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rust tree with the char-misc 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 16 Apr 2021 10:10:46 +0200
From:   Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Hang Lu <hangl@...eaurora.org>,
        Li Li <dualli@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marco Ballesio <balejs@...gle.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the rust tree with the char-misc tree

On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 05:58:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the rust tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/uapi/linux/android/binder.h
> 
> between commits:
> 
>   432ff1e91694 ("binder: BINDER_FREEZE ioctl")
>   ae28c1be1e54 ("binder: BINDER_GET_FROZEN_INFO ioctl")
>   a7dc1e6f99df ("binder: tell userspace to dump current backtrace when detected oneway spamming")
> 
> from the char-misc tree and commit:
> 
>   1fed5dee5fbb ("Android: Binder IPC in Rust (WIP)")
> 
> from the rust 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.

Hah, yeah, it is going to hit this and needs to be fixed up in the rust
code.  If they really want this as an enum, we can talk about it :)

thanks,

greg k-h