linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs 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: <1b8ee72d-73c0-49f6-bdaa-14faf712f5d1@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 09:40:54 -0400
From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>,
        "jlayton@...nel.org" <jlayton@...nel.org>
Cc: "sfr@...b.auug.org.au" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        "linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree

On 3/21/25 9:37 AM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 09:32 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> On 3/20/25 6:11 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>   fs/nfsd/nfs4callback.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>>   11a149e09d58 ("sunrpc: make rpc_restart_call() and
>>> rpc_restart_call_prepare() void return")
>>>
>>> from the nfs tree and commits:
>>>
>>>   6c1cefb84b3d ("nfsd: lift NFSv4.0 handling out of
>>> nfsd4_cb_sequence_done()")
>>>   f049911b5b98 ("nfsd: only check RPC_SIGNALLED() when restarting
>>> rpc_task")
>>>
>>> from the nfsd 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.
>>
>> Since 11a149e09d58 is only clean up, I prefer that it be dropped from
>> the nfs tree until v6.16. Trond, if you don't want to do that, then I
>> can include a merge conflict notice in my pull request for v6.15.
>>
>>
> 
> Removed and rebased.
> 

Thanks Trond and Stephen!


-- 
Chuck Lever