linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the mm-nonmm-stable tree with the userns 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, 12 May 2022 18:22:15 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the mm-nonmm-stable tree with the
 userns tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the mm-nonmm-stable tree got a conflict in:

  include/linux/ptrace.h

between commit:

  c200e4bb44e8 ("ptrace/um: Replace PT_DTRACE with TIF_SINGLESTEP")

from the userns tree and commit:

  a9866bef5171 ("ptrace: fix wrong comment of PT_DTRACE")

from the mm-nonmm-stable tree.

I fixed it up (the former removed the line modified by the latter, so I
just removed it) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped