linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the libcrypto tree with the libcrypto-fixes 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250701123036.0d25bbfc@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 12:30:36 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>, "Jason A. Donenfeld"
 <Jason@...c4.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Crypto List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing
 List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the libcrypto tree with the
 libcrypto-fixes tree

Hi all,

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

  arch/s390/crypto/sha512_s390.c

between commit:

  400bd45ba798 ("crypto: s390/sha - Fix uninitialized variable in SHA-1 and SHA-2")

from the libcrypto-fixes tree and commit:

  b7b366087e0f ("lib/crypto: s390/sha512: Migrate optimized SHA-512 code to library")

from the libcrypto tree.

I fixed it up (I just deleted the file) 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