From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jmorris@namei.org (James Morris) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 14:59:23 +1000 (AEST) Subject: Security updates for v4.15 and beyond In-Reply-To: <5b63c120-5116-1e77-d090-331d2ae3aa8e@schaufler-ca.com> References: <5b63c120-5116-1e77-d090-331d2ae3aa8e@schaufler-ca.com> Message-ID: To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org On Sun, 24 Sep 2017, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 9/23/2017 10:00 PM, James Morris wrote: > > > > > > I plan on maintaining a separate branch for TPM (and other security > > subsystems) from now on. > > Can you tell us how you expect this to work? I know > there was discussion about this at the Security Summit. > We need to get whatever needs doing lined up if we're > going to make 4.15 happen smoothly. I'll post a more detailed and general update in a few days when I'm back in Sydney, but briefly, send me a pull request against my next-general branch, which replaces the 'next' branch. I'll sync that to -rc2 after this email. I'll fetch your branch into my next-smack branch, which will track next-general. All of these subsystem branches and next-general will be merged into next-testing, for use by Stephen Rothwell for linux-next, and any other general testing which may be done. When the merge window opens, I'll merge the subsystem branches into next-for-linus for him to pull. If all is going well, this will be the same as next-testing. If there are problems in any of the branches, they can be left out of next-for-linus until they're resolved. Linus can then pull from that to get everything at once, or pull individual branches as he sees fit. In summary: track my next-general branch instead of 'next', and your workflow is otherwise unchanged. How does that sound? -- James Morris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html