Linux-Next Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree
@ 2020-05-21  0:30 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2020-05-21  0:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaegeuk Kim, Theodore Ts'o, Eric Biggers
  Cc: Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 703 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in:

  fs/f2fs/f2fs.h

between commit:

  ed318a6cc0b6 ("fscrypt: support test_dummy_encryption=v2")

from the fscrypt tree and commit:

  1ae18f71cb52 ("f2fs: fix checkpoint=disable:%u%%")

from the f2fs 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree
  2019-01-02  0:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2019-01-02  4:56   ` Chandan Rajendra
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Chandan Rajendra @ 2019-01-02  4:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen Rothwell
  Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Jaegeuk Kim, Linux Next Mailing List,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List, Chandan Rajendra

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 5:56:10 AM IST Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 10:13:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   fs/f2fs/dir.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   848a010287e6 ("f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status")
> > 
> > from the fscrypt tree and commit:
> > 
> >   4e240d1bab1e ("f2fs: check memory boundary by insane namelen")
> > 
> > from the f2fs 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.
> > 
> 
> This is now a conflict between the fscrypt tree and Linus' tree.
> 
> 

fscrypt's master branch has fsverity patches applied. These are not available
on Linus' tree. Hence the conflict.

Just FYI, The discussion on merging fsverity into mainline kernel is still
going on.

-- 
chandan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree
  2018-12-10 23:13 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2019-01-02  0:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
  2019-01-02  4:56   ` Chandan Rajendra
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2019-01-02  0:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Theodore Ts'o
  Cc: Jaegeuk Kim, Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Chandan Rajendra


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1831 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 10:13:22 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/f2fs/dir.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   848a010287e6 ("f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status")
> 
> from the fscrypt tree and commit:
> 
>   4e240d1bab1e ("f2fs: check memory boundary by insane namelen")
> 
> from the f2fs 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.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc fs/f2fs/dir.c
> index cf9e2564388d,c0c845da12fa..000000000000
> --- a/fs/f2fs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/dir.c
> @@@ -808,7 -808,18 +808,18 @@@ int f2fs_fill_dentries(struct dir_conte
>   		de_name.name = d->filename[bit_pos];
>   		de_name.len = le16_to_cpu(de->name_len);
>   
> + 		/* check memory boundary before moving forward */
> + 		bit_pos += GET_DENTRY_SLOTS(le16_to_cpu(de->name_len));
> + 		if (unlikely(bit_pos > d->max)) {
> + 			f2fs_msg(sbi->sb, KERN_WARNING,
> + 				"%s: corrupted namelen=%d, run fsck to fix.",
> + 				__func__, le16_to_cpu(de->name_len));
> + 			set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
> + 			err = -EINVAL;
> + 			goto out;
> + 		}
> + 
>  -		if (f2fs_encrypted_inode(d->inode)) {
>  +		if (IS_ENCRYPTED(d->inode)) {
>   			int save_len = fstr->len;
>   
>   			err = fscrypt_fname_disk_to_usr(d->inode,

This is now a conflict between the fscrypt tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree
@ 2018-12-10 23:13 Stephen Rothwell
  2019-01-02  0:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2018-12-10 23:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaegeuk Kim, Theodore Ts'o
  Cc: Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Chandan Rajendra


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1545 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in:

  fs/f2fs/dir.c

between commit:

  848a010287e6 ("f2fs: use IS_ENCRYPTED() to check encryption status")

from the fscrypt tree and commit:

  4e240d1bab1e ("f2fs: check memory boundary by insane namelen")

from the f2fs 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc fs/f2fs/dir.c
index cf9e2564388d,c0c845da12fa..000000000000
--- a/fs/f2fs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/dir.c
@@@ -808,7 -808,18 +808,18 @@@ int f2fs_fill_dentries(struct dir_conte
  		de_name.name = d->filename[bit_pos];
  		de_name.len = le16_to_cpu(de->name_len);
  
+ 		/* check memory boundary before moving forward */
+ 		bit_pos += GET_DENTRY_SLOTS(le16_to_cpu(de->name_len));
+ 		if (unlikely(bit_pos > d->max)) {
+ 			f2fs_msg(sbi->sb, KERN_WARNING,
+ 				"%s: corrupted namelen=%d, run fsck to fix.",
+ 				__func__, le16_to_cpu(de->name_len));
+ 			set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_NEED_FSCK);
+ 			err = -EINVAL;
+ 			goto out;
+ 		}
+ 
 -		if (f2fs_encrypted_inode(d->inode)) {
 +		if (IS_ENCRYPTED(d->inode)) {
  			int save_len = fstr->len;
  
  			err = fscrypt_fname_disk_to_usr(d->inode,

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree
@ 2018-01-14 22:17 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2018-01-14 22:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaegeuk Kim, Theodore Ts'o
  Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Eric Biggers,
	Chao Yu

Hi Jaegeuk,

Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in:

  fs/f2fs/namei.c

between commit:

  393c038f5c55 ("f2fs: switch to fscrypt ->symlink() helper functions")

from the fscrypt tree and commit:

  acbf054d537d ("f2fs: inject fault to kzalloc")

from the f2fs tree.

I fixed it up (I just dropped the change to this file from the latter
commit) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree
@ 2017-05-03 23:40 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-05-03 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaegeuk Kim, Theodore Ts'o
  Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Tomohiro Kusumi

Hi Jaegeuk,

Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in:

  fs/f2fs/inline.c

between commit:

  5fc36386d220 ("f2fs: check entire encrypted bigname when finding a dentry")

from the fscrypt tree and commit:

  64c24ecb3cff ("f2fs: split make_dentry_ptr() into block and inline versions")

from the f2fs 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc fs/f2fs/inline.c
index fa729ff6b2f9,0ccdefe9fdba..000000000000
--- a/fs/f2fs/inline.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/inline.c
@@@ -533,8 -533,8 +533,8 @@@ int f2fs_add_inline_entry(struct inode 
  
  	f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(ipage, NODE, true);
  
 -	name_hash = f2fs_dentry_hash(new_name);
 +	name_hash = f2fs_dentry_hash(new_name, NULL);
- 	make_dentry_ptr(NULL, &d, (void *)dentry_blk, 2);
+ 	make_dentry_ptr_inline(NULL, &d, dentry_blk);
  	f2fs_update_dentry(ino, mode, &d, new_name, name_hash, bit_pos);
  
  	set_page_dirty(ipage);

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree
@ 2017-02-14 22:51 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-02-14 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jaegeuk Kim, Theodore Ts'o
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Eric Biggers, Bhumika Goyal

Hi Jaegeuk,

Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in:

  fs/f2fs/super.c

between commit:

  a5d431eff2e0 ("fscrypt: make fscrypt_operations.key_prefix a string")

from the fscrypt tree and commit:

  aacf533a90a7 ("f2fs: super: constify fscrypt_operations structure")

from the f2fs 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc fs/f2fs/super.c
index 503c3b7fa053,8a02d747fa97..000000000000
--- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
@@@ -1170,9 -1207,9 +1201,9 @@@ static unsigned f2fs_max_namelen(struc
  			inode->i_sb->s_blocksize : F2FS_NAME_LEN;
  }
  
- static struct fscrypt_operations f2fs_cryptops = {
+ static const struct fscrypt_operations f2fs_cryptops = {
 +	.key_prefix	= "f2fs:",
  	.get_context	= f2fs_get_context,
 -	.key_prefix	= f2fs_key_prefix,
  	.set_context	= f2fs_set_context,
  	.is_encrypted	= f2fs_encrypted_inode,
  	.empty_dir	= f2fs_empty_dir,

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-05-21  0:30 linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree Stephen Rothwell
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-12-10 23:13 Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-02  0:26 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-02  4:56   ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-01-14 22:17 Stephen Rothwell
2017-05-03 23:40 Stephen Rothwell
2017-02-14 22:51 Stephen Rothwell

Linux-Next Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/0 linux-next/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-next linux-next/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next \
		linux-next@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-next

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-next


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git