linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the cifs 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: <20240913085945.40e7accf@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 08:59:45 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Steve French
 <smfrench@...il.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next
 Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Steve French
 <stfrench@...rosoft.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the cifs tree

Hi all,

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

  fs/smb/client/cifsencrypt.c

between commit:

  192bbbf2bd41 ("cifs: Fix signature miscalculation")

from the cifs tree and commits:

  4aa571d67e81 ("cifs: Don't support ITER_XARRAY")

from the vfs-brauner tree.

I fixed it up (the latter removed the line update by the former, so I just
use latter version) 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