Hi Linus, Stephen, 2017-04-11 14:02 GMT+09:00 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Hi Herbert, > > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 10:42:15 +0800 Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Actually the patch in the kbuild tree should be reverted because >> we have now increased the in-kernel length limit and this must not >> be directly exposed to user-space or it'll break compatibility. > > So basically we need CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME to be 64 in the exported > header but 128 in the kernel header? In which case the kbuild patch > needs to be changed not removed. Or the merge resolution needs to be > cleverer. In the development cycle for 4.12-rc1, some patches from Kbuild cause conflicts in linux-next from time to time. The patches in linux-kbuild/uapi branch touched some files in other subsystems because they are prerequisites to export the uapi directory as-is. Most of the conflicts are trivial to fix-up, and they are handled nicely thanks to Stephen. But, today's one is hard: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/10/1208 As Herbert suggested, the easiest way is to revert c394d1683, but reverting it will cause an error in Kbuild tree: .../linux/cryptouser.h:58:16: error: ‘CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME’ undeclared here (not in a function) So, I will rebase the linux-kbuild/uapi branch onto Linus's tree (resolving all conflicts) after crypto changes are pulled during the next merge window. Then, I will send the kbuild/uapi pull request so that Linus can pull it with no (less) conflicts. The commit c394d1683 will effectively be dropped. I think this is the cleanest way to fix the issue. Please let me know if you see problems in this plan. Thanks. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada -- 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
