linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ftrace tree with the vfs-brauner 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]

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 09:07:54 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	Christian Göttsche <cgzones@...glemail.com>,
	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 ftrace tree with the vfs-brauner
 tree

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:42:43AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the ftrace tree got conflicts in:
> 
>   arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
>   include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   e6873349f700 ("fs/xattr: add *at family syscalls")
> 
> from the vfs-brauner tree and commit:
> 
>   190fec72df4a ("uprobe: Wire up uretprobe system call")
> 
> from the ftrace 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 arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
> index 26af003921d2,6452c2ec469a..000000000000
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
> @@@ -385,10 -384,7 +385,11 @@@
>   460	common	lsm_set_self_attr	sys_lsm_set_self_attr
>   461	common	lsm_list_modules	sys_lsm_list_modules
>   462 	common  mseal			sys_mseal
>  -463	64	uretprobe		sys_uretprobe
>  +463	common	setxattrat		sys_setxattrat
>  +464	common	getxattrat		sys_getxattrat
>  +465	common	listxattrat		sys_listxattrat
>  +466	common	removexattrat		sys_removexattrat
> ++467	64	uretprobe		sys_uretprobe
>   
>   #
>   # Due to a historical design error, certain syscalls are numbered differently
> diff --cc include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
> index 5b8dab0b934e,2378f88d5ad4..000000000000
> --- a/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
> @@@ -845,17 -845,11 +845,20 @@@ __SYSCALL(__NR_lsm_list_modules, sys_ls
>   #define __NR_mseal 462
>   __SYSCALL(__NR_mseal, sys_mseal)
>   
>  -#define __NR_uretprobe 463
>  +#define __NR_setxattrat 463
>  +__SYSCALL(__NR_setxattrat, sys_setxattrat)
>  +#define __NR_getxattrat 464
>  +__SYSCALL(__NR_getxattrat, sys_getxattrat)
>  +#define __NR_listxattrat 465
>  +__SYSCALL(__NR_listxattrat, sys_listxattrat)
>  +#define __NR_removexattrat 466
>  +__SYSCALL(__NR_removexattrat, sys_removexattrat)
>  +
> ++#define __NR_uretprobe 467
> + __SYSCALL(__NR_uretprobe, sys_uretprobe)

hi,
we need one more change in tests (below), otherwise lgtm
I can send formal patch for you if needed, plz let me know

thanks,
jirka


---
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c
index c8517c8f5313..bd8c75b620c2 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_syscall.c
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ static void test_uretprobe_regs_change(void)
 }
 
 #ifndef __NR_uretprobe
-#define __NR_uretprobe 463
+#define __NR_uretprobe 467
 #endif
 
 __naked unsigned long uretprobe_syscall_call_1(void)