[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aNJcC3aAfJ-gCv6m@willie-the-truck>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 09:36:27 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>,
Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
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 arm64 tree with the origin tree
On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 10:25:12AM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the arm64 tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>
> between commit:
>
> ceca927c86e6f ("arm64: mm: Fix CFI failure due to kpti_ng_pgd_alloc function signature")
>
> from the origin tree and commit:
>
> fa93b45fd397e ("arm64: Enable vmalloc-huge with ptdump")
>
> from the arm64 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.
>
> diff --cc arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> index 980d7745a5499,10c2580995814..0000000000000
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> @@@ -47,6 -49,15 +49,8 @@@
> #define NO_CONT_MAPPINGS BIT(1)
> #define NO_EXEC_MAPPINGS BIT(2) /* assumes FEAT_HPDS is not used */
>
> -enum pgtable_type {
> - TABLE_PTE,
> - TABLE_PMD,
> - TABLE_PUD,
> - TABLE_P4D,
> -};
> -
> + DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(arm64_ptdump_lock_key);
> +
Thanks, the the correct resolution. I'll merge in for-next/fixes soon
(we have a dangling patch that depends on it) so this will disappear.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists