Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
arch/x86/Kconfig
between commits:
9e2b4be377f0 ("ima: add a new CONFIG for loading arch-specific policies")
from the integrity tree and commit:
faaa52178603 ("userfaultfd: wp: add WP pagetable tracking to x86")
from the akpm-current 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.
Note that I put the selects in their correct alphabetical position as
asked by the comment higher up in the file. If that had been done in
the patches, then there would have been no conflicts ...
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc arch/x86/Kconfig
index 4e4f6f4200b8,ca6f12f34d92..000000000000
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@@ -137,6 -138,6 +137,7 @@@ config X8
select HAVE_ARCH_JUMP_LABEL_RELATIVE
select HAVE_ARCH_KASAN if X86_64
select HAVE_ARCH_KASAN_VMALLOC if X86_64
++ select HAVE_ARCH_KCSAN if X86_64
select HAVE_ARCH_KGDB
select HAVE_ARCH_MMAP_RND_BITS if MMU
select HAVE_ARCH_MMAP_RND_COMPAT_BITS if MMU && COMPAT
@@@ -148,6 -149,6 +149,7 @@@
select HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK
select HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
select HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_PUD if X86_64
++ select HAVE_ARCH_USERFAULTFD_WP if USERFAULTFD
select HAVE_ARCH_VMAP_STACK if X86_64
select HAVE_ARCH_WITHIN_STACK_FRAMES
select HAVE_ASM_MODVERSIONS
@@@ -229,8 -230,7 +231,7 @@@
select VIRT_TO_BUS
select X86_FEATURE_NAMES if PROC_FS
select PROC_PID_ARCH_STATUS if PROC_FS
- select HAVE_ARCH_KCSAN if X86_64
- select HAVE_ARCH_USERFAULTFD_WP if USERFAULTFD
+ imply IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT if EFI
config INSTRUCTION_DECODER
def_bool y
On Fri, 2020-03-13 at 21:07 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/x86/Kconfig
>
> between commits:
>
> 9e2b4be377f0 ("ima: add a new CONFIG for loading arch-specific policies")
>
> from the integrity tree and commit:
>
> faaa52178603 ("userfaultfd: wp: add WP pagetable tracking to x86")
>
> from the akpm-current 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.
>
> Note that I put the selects in their correct alphabetical position as
> asked by the comment higher up in the file. If that had been done in
> the patches, then there would have been no conflicts ...
True. Thanks, Stephan. Before moving it to "its proper location",
I'm wondering if there should be a separate section for "imply".
Mimi