Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 06 Jul 2022 16:30:56 +0530
From:   "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kexec_file: Drop weak attribute from functions
To:     Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>, Coiby Xu <coxu@redhat.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <cover.1656659357.git.naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <2cd7ca1fe4d6bb6ca38e3283c717878388ed6788.1656659357.git.naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <YsJoGKribMH77HBQ@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> <20220706015308.heynqgictt47r3c5@Rk>
In-Reply-To: <20220706015308.heynqgictt47r3c5@Rk>
User-Agent: astroid/4d6b06ad (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid)
Message-Id: <1657104347.v93p7p5tyq.naveen@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

Hi Coiby,

Coiby Xu wrote:
> Hi Baoquan and Naveen,
>=20
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 12:10:00PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>>On 07/01/22 at 01:04pm, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
>>> Drop __weak attribute from functions in kexec_file.c:
>>> - arch_kexec_kernel_image_probe()
>>> - arch_kimage_file_post_load_cleanup()
>>> - arch_kexec_kernel_image_load()
>>> - arch_kexec_locate_mem_hole()
>>> - arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig()
>>>
>>> arch_kexec_kernel_image_load() calls into kexec_image_load_default(), so
>>> drop the static attribute for the latter.
>>>
>>> arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig() is not overridden by any architecture, so
>>> drop the __weak attribute.
>>
>>The dropping of arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig() conflicts with patch 1 of
>>anotherpatchset, and the other patches in the patchset depends on the
>>patch 1.
>>
>>[PATCH v9 0/4] unify the keyrings of arm64 and s390 with x86 to verify ke=
xec'ed kernel signature
>>
>>Hi, Naveen, Coiby,
>>
>>Please negotiate how to solve the conflict.
>=20
> Thanks Baoquan for letting me know of this conflict. Naveen, how about
> resolving the conflict based on which patch is merged first? If your
> patch set is going to be merged early, I will resolve the conflict in my
> patch set, and vice versa.

Sure, that's fair. It looks like Andrew has queued up this series=20
though:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git/log/?h=3Dmm-non=
mm-unstable

The conflict itself is trivial, so it should be straightforward to=20
address it.


Thanks,
Naveen