linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the crypto tree with Linus' 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230626115246.40f74129@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2023 11:52:46 +1000
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Linux Crypto List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the crypto tree with Linus' tree

Hi all,

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

  crypto/asymmetric_keys/public_key.c

between commit:

  c3d03e8e35e0 ("KEYS: asymmetric: Copy sig and digest in public_key_verify_signature()")

from Linus' tree and commits:

  e5221fa6a355 ("KEYS: asymmetric: Move sm2 code into x509_public_key")
  63ba4d67594a ("KEYS: asymmetric: Use new crypto interface without scatterlists")

from the crypto tree.

I fixed it up (I effectively reverted the former commit - which may or may
not be the correc thing to do) 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