On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 12:28 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the security tree got conflicts in: > > include/linux/lsm_hooks.h > security/security.c > > between commit: > > 3346ada04cf5 ("bcachefs: do not use PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM") > > from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit: > > 711f5c5ce6c2 ("lsm: cleanup lsm_hooks.h") > > from the security tree. > > I fixed it up (I used the latter version ofinclude/linux/lsm_hooks.h > and 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. Thanks Stephen. > diff --cc security/security.c > index 3581262da5ee,4564a0a1e4ef..000000000000 > --- a/security/security.c > +++ b/security/security.c > @@@ -660,7 -745,7 +745,7 @@@ static int lsm_file_alloc(struct file * > * > * Returns 0, or -ENOMEM if memory can't be allocated. > */ > - int lsm_inode_alloc(struct inode *inode, gfp_t gfp) > -static int lsm_inode_alloc(struct inode *inode) > ++static int lsm_inode_alloc(struct inode *inode, gfp_t gfp) > { > if (!lsm_inode_cache) { > inode->i_security = NULL; -- paul-moore.com