linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the cifs tree with the fscache 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 16 Dec 2021 12:43:17 +0000
From:   broonie@...nel.org
To:     Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@...rosoft.com>,
        Steve French <stfrench@...rosoft.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the cifs tree with the fscache tree

Hi all,

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

  fs/cifs/inode.c

between commit:

  830c476f5eb82 ("cifs: Support fscache indexing rewrite (untested)")

from the fscache tree and commit:

  68f87ec9c1ce3 ("cifs: ignore resource_id while getting fscache super cookie")

from the cifs 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.

diff --cc fs/cifs/inode.c
index dc2fe76450b96,279622e4eb1c2..0000000000000
--- a/fs/cifs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/cifs/inode.c
@@@ -1372,20 -1370,6 +1367,7 @@@ iget_no_retry
  		iget_failed(inode);
  		inode = ERR_PTR(rc);
  	}
 +
- 	if (!rc) {
- 		/*
- 		 * The cookie is initialized from volume info returned above.
- 		 * Inside cifs_fscache_get_super_cookie it checks
- 		 * that we do not get super cookie twice.
- 		 */
- 		rc = cifs_fscache_get_super_cookie(tcon);
- 		if (rc < 0) {
- 			iget_failed(inode);
- 			inode = ERR_PTR(rc);
- 		}
- 	}
- 
  out:
  	kfree(path);
  	free_xid(xid);