linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the vfs-brauner 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: <20250708-podest-waldbestand-1d2bcbabad8c@brauner>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 10:15:45 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the vfs-brauner
 tree

On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 01:45:50AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 01:25:09AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> 
> > Umm...  Let's do it that way - fs/fhandle.c chunk of that commit is
> > trivially split off and the rest should not conflict at all.
> > 
> > Christian, would you mind throwing this on top of your vfs.pidfs?  I'm dropping
> > that part from my #work.misc commit...
> 
> Argh...  Sorry, no go - that chunk needs to go before the rest of conversion
> commit.  Hmm...
> 
> See vfs/vfs.git #vfs-6.17.fs_struct; that branches off your "reflow" commit
> and it merges clean with #vfs.all, AFAICS.
> 
> Are you OK with that variant?  I've no strong preferences re branchpoints,
> but some folks do - no idea if you have any policies in that respect.

Whatever makes collaboration here easier I'm happy to go with! Thanks
for jumping on this so quicly?

> If you don't have any problems with it, just merge it into #vfs.all
> and I'll drop that commit from #work.misc

Sure! Let me grab it.