linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the arm64 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]

Message-ID: <ZIrMrHt8IpUKL8DG@arm.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2023 09:32:44 +0100
From:   Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:     Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Christoffer Dall <cdall@...columbia.edu>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-arm tree with the arm64 tree

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 07:37:23AM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 12:45:58PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Today's linux-next merge of the kvm-arm tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   arch/arm64/kernel/kaslr.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   6e13b6b923b3 ("arm64: kaslr: split kaslr/module initialization")
> >   e46b7103aef3 ("arm64: module: move module randomization to module.c")
> > 
> > from the arm64 tree and commit:
> > 
> >   0ddc312b7c73 ("arm64: Turn kaslr_feature_override into a generic SW feature override")
> > 
> > from the kvm-arm 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 LGTM, thanks Stephen.
> 
> Catalin, I'd like to resolve this in the kvmarm tree and merge
> for-next/module-alloc. You alright with that?

Yes, feel free to pull that into your tree.

-- 
Catalin