linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kspp tree with the tip 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]

Message-ID: <CANpmjNPuG+=qoiZ6M3UzZNfXq3tpS59GPrH358md+q5gxZzTRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 6 Sep 2022 10:41:11 +0200
From:   Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kspp tree with the tip tree

On Tue, 6 Sept 2022 at 09:49, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the kspp tree got a conflict in:
>
>   lib/Kconfig.debug
>
> between commit:
>
>   724c299c6a0e ("perf/hw_breakpoint: Add KUnit test for constraints accounting")
>
> from the tip tree and commit:
>
>   bb26bbd0a067 ("fortify: Add KUnit test for FORTIFY_SOURCE internals")
>
> from the kspp 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.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc lib/Kconfig.debug
> index e40550a5bdd3,1f267c0ddffd..000000000000
> --- a/lib/Kconfig.debug
> +++ b/lib/Kconfig.debug
> @@@ -2533,16 -2542,15 +2545,25 @@@ config STACKINIT_KUNIT_TES
>           CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK, CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF,
>           or CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF_ALL.
>
>  +config HW_BREAKPOINT_KUNIT_TEST
>  +      bool "Test hw_breakpoint constraints accounting" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
>  +      depends on HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT
>  +      depends on KUNIT=y
>  +      default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
>  +      help
>  +        Tests for hw_breakpoint constraints accounting.
>  +
>  +        If unsure, say N.
>  +
> + config FORTIFY_KUNIT_TEST
> +       tristate "Test fortified str*() and mem*() function internals at runtime" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> +       depends on KUNIT && FORTIFY_SOURCE
> +       default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> +       help
> +         Builds unit tests for checking internals of FORTIFY_SOURCE as used
> +         by the str*() and mem*() family of functions. For testing runtime
> +         traps of FORTIFY_SOURCE, see LKDTM's "FORTIFY_*" tests.
> +
>   config TEST_UDELAY
>         tristate "udelay test driver"
>         help

Looks good to me, thanks!

Reviewed-by: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>