linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the execve tree with the vfs 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 13 Dec 2022 10:12:47 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.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 execve tree with the vfs tree

Hi all,

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 14:37:04 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the execve tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/binfmt_elf.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   9a938eba8d28 ("kill coredump_params->regs")
> 
> from the vfs tree and commit:
> 
>   8f6e3f9e5a0f ("binfmt: Fix whitespace issues")
> 
> from the execve tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I just use the former where they conflicted, so may have
> lost some white space fixups) 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.

This is now a conflict between the vfs tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped