From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the userns tree with the arm tree Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 13:29:55 -0500 Message-ID: <876039uf30.fsf@xmission.com> References: <20180525101455.GI4828@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180525101455.GI4828@sirena.org.uk> (Mark Brown's message of "Fri, 25 May 2018 11:14:55 +0100") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Russell King , Florian Fainelli , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org Mark Brown writes: > Hi Eric, > > Yesterday's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in: > > arch/arm/mm/fault.c > > between commit: > > 8d9267cedb9e1d8edb8 ("ARM: spectre-v2: harden user aborts in kernel space") > > from the arm tree and commit: > > 3eb0f5193b497083391 ("signal: Ensure every siginfo we send has all bits initialized") > > from the userns 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. Mark. Did you get a bounce from this email? I saw this when perusing lkml but I did not receive a copy of this directly to myself. Eric > diff --cc arch/arm/mm/fault.c > index 3b1ba003c4f9,32034543f49c..000000000000 > --- a/arch/arm/mm/fault.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mm/fault.c > @@@ -163,9 -163,8 +163,11 @@@ __do_user_fault(struct task_struct *tsk > { > struct siginfo si; > > + clear_siginfo(&si); > + > + if (addr > TASK_SIZE) > + harden_branch_predictor(); > + > #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_USER > if (((user_debug & UDBG_SEGV) && (sig == SIGSEGV)) || > ((user_debug & UDBG_BUS) && (sig == SIGBUS))) {