linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the apparmor tree with the libcrypto 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250704153630.0fb1e2f3@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 15:36:30 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>, 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>, Eric Biggers
 <ebiggers@...gle.com>, 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 apparmor tree with the libcrypto
 tree

Hi all,

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

  security/apparmor/crypto.c

between commit:

  ad7ca74e1c60 ("apparmor: use SHA-256 library API instead of crypto_shash API")

from the libcrypto tree and commit:

  e9ed1eb8f621 ("apparmor: use SHA-256 library API instead of crypto_shash API")

from the apparmor tree.

I fixed it up (I used the former version since it appears to be much
newer) 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