linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfs tree with Linus' 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: <aTIxJixIhp7SuL2b@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 20:11:02 -0500
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...il.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.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 nfs tree with Linus' tree

On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 07:34:30PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-12-05 at 11:19 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the nfs tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   fs/nfs/localio.c
> > 
> > between commits:
> > 
> >   94afb627dfc2 ("nfs: use credential guards in
> > nfs_local_call_read()")
> >   bff3c841f7bd ("nfs: use credential guards in
> > nfs_local_call_write()")
> >   1d18101a644e ("Merge tag 'kernel-6.19-rc1.cred' of
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/vfs")
> > 
> > from Linus' tree and commit:
> > 
> >   30a4385509b4 ("nfs/localio: fix regression due to out-of-order
> > __put_cred")
> > 
> > from the nfs tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (I just dropped the nfs tree commit) 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.
> 
> I'm worried that resolving this is not going to be trivial...
> 
> The nfs tree commit is a fix for a regression that appeared in 6.18,
> and the problem with just dropping it in favour of the scoped cred
> version in Christian's tree is that that appears to propagate the
> regression.
> 
> Mike, am I wrong?

You're correct. But I just sent how I think we need to handle this.

Thanks,
Mike