linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm 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]

Message-ID: <20250516195446.1331ac06@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 19:54:46 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
 <rjw@...ysocki.net>, "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>, Artem
 Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
 <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree

Hi Ingo,

On Fri, 16 May 2025 09:54:35 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> So I don't think the <asm/cpuid.h> change is needed - the header still 
> fully exists:
> 
>   starship:~/tip> ls -lh arch/x86/include/asm/cpuid/api.h arch/x86/include/asm/cpuid.h  
>   -rw-rw-r-- 1 mingo mingo 6.1K May 16 09:34 arch/x86/include/asm/cpuid/api.h
>   -rw-rw-r-- 1 mingo mingo  149 May 16 09:34 arch/x86/include/asm/cpuid.h

That change is in the tip tree and involved in the conflict, so I just
used it as it was in the tip tree.  This is normal conflict resolution.

> And the <linux/sysfs.h> addition is probably a build fix for the PM 
> tree? The <asm/cpuid.h> header's indirect header dependencies did not 
> change. Should probably not be carried in -next, as this masks a build 
> failure that will then trigger in Linus's tree?

Well, it did not fail building yesterday (without the include) and
looks like the commit is adding the first sysfs use in this file ..

Mind you, if the sysfs.h include had been added a line or 2 higher up -
or even if there was a blank line between the linux/ and asm/ includes,
there may have been no conflict reported and git would have produced
the resulting file with both changes all by itself.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped