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: <Z37u8PjNcMwN_LOw@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 16:32:32 -0500
From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Dave Airlie
	<airlied@...hat.com>, Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@...ll.ch>, Jani Nikula
	<jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, Joonas Lahtinen
	<joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>, Intel Graphics
	<intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>, DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
	<linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the mm tree

On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 12:16:50PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:03:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   4fc0cee83590 ("drivers: remove get_task_comm() and print task comm directly")

I don't believe this patch was acked by us, next time it would be good to get
different patches for different drivers with the proper acks for visibility on
these kind of conflicts.

But if the conflicts are easy to handle right now, let it be...

> > 
> > from the mm-nonmm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:
> > 
> >   f5d38d4fa884 ("drm/i915/display: convert intel_display_driver.[ch] to struct intel_display")
> > 
> > from the drm-intel 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 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
> > index 62596424a9aa,497b4a1f045f..000000000000
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
> > @@@ -389,8 -397,9 +397,8 @@@ void intel_display_driver_resume_access
> >    * Returns %true if the current thread has display HW access, %false
> >    * otherwise.
> >    */
> > - bool intel_display_driver_check_access(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> > + bool intel_display_driver_check_access(struct intel_display *display)
> >   {
> >  -	char comm[TASK_COMM_LEN];
> >   	char current_task[TASK_COMM_LEN + 16];
> >   	char allowed_task[TASK_COMM_LEN + 16] = "none";
> >   
> > @@@ -399,14 -408,15 +407,14 @@@
> >   		return true;
> >   
> >   	snprintf(current_task, sizeof(current_task), "%s[%d]",
> >  -		 get_task_comm(comm, current),
> >  -		 task_pid_vnr(current));
> >  +		 current->comm, task_pid_vnr(current));
> >   
> > - 	if (i915->display.access.allowed_task)
> > + 	if (display->access.allowed_task)
> >   		snprintf(allowed_task, sizeof(allowed_task), "%s[%d]",
> > - 			 i915->display.access.allowed_task->comm,
> > - 			 task_pid_vnr(i915->display.access.allowed_task));
> >  -			 get_task_comm(comm, display->access.allowed_task),
> > ++			 display->access.allowed_task->comm,
> > + 			 task_pid_vnr(display->access.allowed_task));
> >   
> > - 	drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm,
> > + 	drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> >   		    "Reject display access from task %s (allowed to %s)\n",
> >   		    current_task, allowed_task);
> >   
> 
> This is now a conflict between the drm tree and the mm-nonmm-unstable
> branch of the mm tree.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ