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:   Wed, 27 Oct 2021 22:29:06 +1100
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with the powerpc tree

Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 6:55 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:
>> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> writes:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the audit tree got conflicts in:
>> >
>> >   arch/powerpc/kernel/audit.c
>> >   arch/powerpc/kernel/compat_audit.c
>> >
>> > between commit:
>> >
>> >   566af8cda399 ("powerpc/audit: Convert powerpc to AUDIT_ARCH_COMPAT_GENERIC")
>> >
>> > from the powerpc tree and commits:
>> >
>> >   42f355ef59a2 ("audit: replace magic audit syscall class numbers with macros")
>> >   1c30e3af8a79 ("audit: add support for the openat2 syscall")
>> >
>> > from the audit tree.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> I guess this is OK, unless the audit folks disagree. I could revert the
>> powerpc commit and try it again later.
>>
>> If I don't hear anything I'll leave it as-is.
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Last I recall from the powerpc/audit thread there were still some
> issues with audit working properly in your testing, has that been
> resolved?

No.

There's one test failure both before and after the conversion to use the
generic code.

> If nothing else, -rc7 seems a bit late for this to hit -next for me to
> feel comfortable about this.

OK. I'll revert the patch in my tree.

cheers

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ