Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with the powerpc tree
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhTj7gn3iAOYctVRKvv_Bk1iQMrmkA8FVJtYzdvBjqFmvg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20211026133147.35d19e00@canb.auug.org.au>
 <87k0i0awdl.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
 <CAHC9VhTj7gn3iAOYctVRKvv_Bk1iQMrmkA8FVJtYzdvBjqFmvg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Oct 2021 22:29:06 +1100
Message-ID: <87tuh2aepp.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 6:55 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the audit tree got conflicts in:
>> >
>> >   arch/powerpc/kernel/audit.c
>> >   arch/powerpc/kernel/compat_audit.c
>> >
>> > between commit:
>> >
>> >   566af8cda399 ("powerpc/audit: Convert powerpc to AUDIT_ARCH_COMPAT_GENERIC")
>> >
>> > from the powerpc tree and commits:
>> >
>> >   42f355ef59a2 ("audit: replace magic audit syscall class numbers with macros")
>> >   1c30e3af8a79 ("audit: add support for the openat2 syscall")
>> >
>> > from the audit tree.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> I guess this is OK, unless the audit folks disagree. I could revert the
>> powerpc commit and try it again later.
>>
>> If I don't hear anything I'll leave it as-is.
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Last I recall from the powerpc/audit thread there were still some
> issues with audit working properly in your testing, has that been
> resolved?

No.

There's one test failure both before and after the conversion to use the
generic code.

> If nothing else, -rc7 seems a bit late for this to hit -next for me to
> feel comfortable about this.

OK. I'll revert the patch in my tree.

cheers