linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree with the fscrypt tree

linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree with the fscrypt tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1556 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  fs/ubifs/Kconfig

between commit:

  6956097c429a ("fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option")

from the fscrypt tree and commit:

  1341551f1e2a ("ubifs: CONFIG_UBIFS_FS_AUTHENTICATION should depend on UBIFS_FS")

from the ubifs 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/ubifs/Kconfig
index ff7ea6f04555,bc1e082d921d..000000000000
--- a/fs/ubifs/Kconfig
+++ b/fs/ubifs/Kconfig
@@@ -65,9 -60,20 +62,9 @@@ config UBIFS_FS_XATT
  
  	  If unsure, say Y.
  
 -config UBIFS_FS_ENCRYPTION
 -	bool "UBIFS Encryption"
 -	depends on UBIFS_FS_XATTR && BLOCK
 -	select FS_ENCRYPTION
 -	default n
 -	help
 -	  Enable encryption of UBIFS files and directories. This
 -	  feature is similar to ecryptfs, but it is more memory
 -	  efficient since it avoids caching the encrypted and
 -	  decrypted pages in the page cache.
 -
  config UBIFS_FS_SECURITY
  	bool "UBIFS Security Labels"
- 	depends on UBIFS_FS && UBIFS_FS_XATTR
+ 	depends on UBIFS_FS_XATTR
  	default y
  	help
  	  Security labels provide an access control facility to support Linux

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree with the fscrypt tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 10:24:25 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/ubifs/Kconfig
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   6956097c429a ("fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option")
> 
> from the fscrypt tree and commit:
> 
>   1341551f1e2a ("ubifs: CONFIG_UBIFS_FS_AUTHENTICATION should depend on UBIFS_FS")
> 
> from the ubifs 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/ubifs/Kconfig
> index ff7ea6f04555,bc1e082d921d..000000000000
> --- a/fs/ubifs/Kconfig
> +++ b/fs/ubifs/Kconfig
> @@@ -65,9 -60,20 +62,9 @@@ config UBIFS_FS_XATT
>   
>   	  If unsure, say Y.
>   
>  -config UBIFS_FS_ENCRYPTION
>  -	bool "UBIFS Encryption"
>  -	depends on UBIFS_FS_XATTR && BLOCK
>  -	select FS_ENCRYPTION
>  -	default n
>  -	help
>  -	  Enable encryption of UBIFS files and directories. This
>  -	  feature is similar to ecryptfs, but it is more memory
>  -	  efficient since it avoids caching the encrypted and
>  -	  decrypted pages in the page cache.
>  -
>   config UBIFS_FS_SECURITY
>   	bool "UBIFS Security Labels"
> - 	depends on UBIFS_FS && UBIFS_FS_XATTR
> + 	depends on UBIFS_FS_XATTR
>   	default y
>   	help
>   	  Security labels provide an access control facility to support Linux

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

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell