From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 864D7C54EE9 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 19:30:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230385AbiI0TaW (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:30:22 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53028 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229616AbiI0TaR (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:30:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1235A7F27C for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id g1-20020a17090a708100b00203c1c66ae3so10991044pjk.2 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:30:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=844Pn5/LmB3AgRBlNHvx7SD6mQmPiws8Jz+CEqeNnBo=; b=NIU9GtqmP9SDovCmNROhmPvmHVSL46uToOK7pH6L3+xEm/abkir/lYfF28EfoVzaJE kEvjRmoqPn6n9rXPvTiGDvjIjvZiiWEuBmI6Fu/izAFImycrwcT7EySvkV6kA9KXWfc2 GYaKA1YJM5uZDZVZ5HSkj9e/QZgOHJ44Opmqo= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=844Pn5/LmB3AgRBlNHvx7SD6mQmPiws8Jz+CEqeNnBo=; b=JPBH9g7eDoWnjpQdIWjcfjgGx1bmIb9S6fvfdiAb1CrKvnBUbHcoQUbI0C4mbAGK3w an9BvaLseCspSXmwQLqP4oyGJPzzdOUaf7onRNj0pl//HvTLqyIr9jjiGyrvDiJtfIOA raV8RfulgV8rkJSw1M9HRk5Zd2QVvh8mmtgXRm5MYxzEp+y6xYvwnZTMcgHqFKBe668J bXqT/Gt/ktmD0xCgl+UMQfIJu5WBO7leh2tN6tZPoTWFBt9t0vQGVXCzvIr+40EjG4gm gIpQhry2KNM7eeOa9cMn19V5dH/peH65SQyp93XjzxoMx54MLsq0uuDNsMY+wMbfyENR VRSA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0qYYsIo27nyLfMoOXxIJL9o4rRFr3/91bJtYPqEdzGO/YHf0T/ SIzZRyqh1e0eFMIJsyCVjxGMng== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4ueT7KkoBG8PtpFhz2PTg1nUZLbqZsIiH9K9mxTYh5fN11JIHtpv9FEpVzMaKNZ9MptQ2HOw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4d12:b0:202:f027:557e with SMTP id mw18-20020a17090b4d1200b00202f027557emr6325309pjb.1.1664307015549; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c17-20020a170903235100b001732a019dddsm1967091plh.174.2022.09.27.12.30.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:30:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:30:14 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: broonie@kernel.org Cc: Daniel Borkmann , Jiri Olsa , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Peter Zijlstra , Sami Tolvanen , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kspp tree with the bpf-next tree Message-ID: <202209271229.83AC9BAA0F@keescook> References: <20220927190811.514527-1-broonie@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220927190811.514527-1-broonie@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 08:08:11PM +0100, broonie@kernel.org wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the kspp tree got a conflict in: > > tools/objtool/check.c > > between commit: > > 9440155ccb948 ("ftrace: Add HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_NO_PATCHABLE") > > from the bpf-next tree and commit: > > 3c68a92d17add ("objtool: Disable CFI warnings") > > from the kspp 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. > > diff --cc tools/objtool/check.c > index fcc4d8ea8cec3,48e18737a2d18..0000000000000 > --- a/tools/objtool/check.c > +++ b/tools/objtool/check.c > @@@ -4124,7 -4118,7 +4128,8 @@@ static int validate_ibt(struct objtool_ > !strcmp(sec->name, "__ex_table") || > !strcmp(sec->name, "__jump_table") || > !strcmp(sec->name, "__mcount_loc") || > - !strcmp(sec->name, ".kcfi_traps")) > ++ !strcmp(sec->name, ".kcfi_traps")) || > + strstr(sec->name, "__patchable_function_entries")) > continue; > > list_for_each_entry(reloc, &sec->reloc->reloc_list, list) Thanks, yes; this matches what I had when I did a test merge yesterday too. -- Kees Cook