Hi all,
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 10:24:25 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/ubifs/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> 6956097c429a ("fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option")
>
> from the fscrypt tree and commit:
>
> 1341551f1e2a ("ubifs: CONFIG_UBIFS_FS_AUTHENTICATION should depend on UBIFS_FS")
>
> from the ubifs 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.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc fs/ubifs/Kconfig
> index ff7ea6f04555,bc1e082d921d..000000000000
> --- a/fs/ubifs/Kconfig
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/Kconfig
> @@@ -65,9 -60,20 +62,9 @@@ config UBIFS_FS_XATT
>
> If unsure, say Y.
>
> -config UBIFS_FS_ENCRYPTION
> - bool "UBIFS Encryption"
> - depends on UBIFS_FS_XATTR && BLOCK
> - select FS_ENCRYPTION
> - default n
> - help
> - Enable encryption of UBIFS files and directories. This
> - feature is similar to ecryptfs, but it is more memory
> - efficient since it avoids caching the encrypted and
> - decrypted pages in the page cache.
> -
> config UBIFS_FS_SECURITY
> bool "UBIFS Security Labels"
> - depends on UBIFS_FS && UBIFS_FS_XATTR
> + depends on UBIFS_FS_XATTR
> default y
> help
> Security labels provide an access control facility to support Linux
This is now a conflict between Linus' tree and the fscrypt tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
