On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> * Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 7:14 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>> >
>> > arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
>> >
>> > between commit:
>> >
>> > 184d47f0fd36 ("x86/mm: Avoid VLA in pgd_alloc()")
>> >
>> > from Linus' tree and commit:
>> >
>> > 1be3f247c288 ("x86/mm: Avoid VLA in pgd_alloc()")
>> >
>> > from the tip tree.
>> >
>> > I fixed it up (I used the version from Linus' tree) 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.
>
> This is the correct resolution, thanks Stephen!
>
>> Ingo, it looks like that commit needs to be split up again ... Linus's
>> tree still needs the fix for the fix?
>
> -next still had the old commit, I've now refreshed tip:auto-latest so the
> conflict should go away in the next iteration.
>
> Linus's tree has the correct fix.
Ah! Gotcha, okay. I had it backwards. Thanks for checking!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
