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;
Message-ID: <fa9145fe-9815-900f-6dd0-bf80019a319e@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 12 Dec 2022 12:48:07 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.2
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kunit-next tree with the apparmor
 tree
Content-Language: en-US
To:     John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
References: <20221208135327.01364529@canb.auug.org.au>
 <bff89220-df3a-a148-2ba4-6aad3874f322@canonical.com>
 <8e82905f-8bdf-05de-2e6a-d8b896d75910@linuxfoundation.org>
 <0e678eb2-455c-88f5-6732-2e8701ebb6e6@linuxfoundation.org>
 <9b21c055-4e1a-2c34-281c-39af7d73fe80@canonical.com>
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <9b21c055-4e1a-2c34-281c-39af7d73fe80@canonical.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 12/12/22 12:20, John Johansen wrote:
> On 12/12/22 10:03, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 12/12/22 10:52, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> On 12/8/22 13:10, John Johansen wrote:
>>>> On 12/7/22 18:53, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the kunit-next tree got a conflict in:
>>>>>
>>>>>    security/apparmor/policy_unpack.c
>>>>>
>>>>> between commits:
>>>>>
>>>>>    371e50a0b19f ("apparmor: make unpack_array return a trianary value")
>>>>>    73c7e91c8bc9 ("apparmor: Remove unnecessary size check when unpacking trans_table")
>>>>>    217af7e2f4de ("apparmor: refactor profile rules and attachments")
>>>>> (and probably others)
>>>>>
>>>>> from the apparmor tree and commit:
>>>>>
>>>>>    2c92044683f5 ("apparmor: test: make static symbols visible during kunit testing")
>>>>>
>>>>> from the kunit-next tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is somewhat of a mess ... pity there is not a shared branch (or
>>>>> better routing if the patches).
>>>>>
>>>> sorry, there was a miscommunication/misunderstanding, probably all on me, I
>>>> thought the kunit stuff that is conflicting here was going to merge next
>>>> cycle.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> How about I just drop the following for now and handle this in the next cycle?
> 
> if you want, the other way to handle it is we coordinate our pull requests.
> You go first. And then I will submit a little later in the week, with the
> references to the merge conflict and a pointer to a branch with it resolved.
> This isn't even a particularly tricky merge conflict, it just has the little
> subtly around making sure the include symbols are conditional.
> 

I assume Linus will not see any problems without your pull requests. In which
case we can do this:

- I send my pull request today
- You can follow with yours with the fixes later on this week

> This doesn't affect me much as there is already another merge conflict with
> the security tree that I need to deal with.
> 


>> I think it might be least confusing option. Let me know. I can just do that
>> and then send pull request in a day or tow once things settle down in next.
>>
>> 2c92044683f5 ("apparmor: test: make static symbols visible during kunit testing")
>>
> 
> that is the other option. If you go that route I can help you do the rebase/merge
> fix.
> 

Let's go with your earlier suggestion.

> looking back at this, there wasn't anything explicit about this not going upstream
> this cycle, I must have just assumed as the final version came about after rc7. So
> my bad.
> 

Right - I ended up taking this as it looked like a patch if included could
enable other changes to follow without being blocked. Also rc8 was in plan.

thanks,
-- Shuah