Hi Mimi, On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:06:37 -0500 Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 03:16 +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > > > FWIW, I'm going to pull the part that introduces memdup_user_nul() into > > a never-rebased branch and if security.git is willing to pull it and handle > > that conversion in ima_write_policy() themselves, I'll be only glad to drop > > the corresponding chunk in vfs.git#for-next > > As memdup_user_nul() is not in the security tree, it would break the > security tree builds. Having the patch in the linux-integrity/next > branch wouldn't help matters. I think Al intends for you to merge his "never-rebased branch" that contains the memdup_user_nul patch into the integrity tree (or James to merge it into the security tree). He will also merge the same branch into his vfs tree and remove the patch that updates ima_write_policy() to use memdup_user_nul() and you (or James) could apply that patch in the integrity (or security) tree. This way we end up with the same commit creating memdup_user_nul() in both trees and no left over conflicts. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
