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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 092BEC28CF8 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 05:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC1F8204FD for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 05:50:07 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CC1F8204FD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xmission.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726597AbeJONdt (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Oct 2018 09:33:49 -0400 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:48497 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726098AbeJONdt (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Oct 2018 09:33:49 -0400 Received: from in02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.52]) by out03.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvlT-000213-Kg; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 23:50:03 -0600 Received: from 67-3-154-154.omah.qwest.net ([67.3.154.154] helo=x220.xmission.com) by in02.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1gBvlS-00058P-O9; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 23:50:03 -0600 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dave Hansen References: <20181015151159.5ce4faa5@canb.auug.org.au> <20181015153437.70179aaf@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 00:49:49 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20181015153437.70179aaf@canb.auug.org.au> (Stephen Rothwell's message of "Mon, 15 Oct 2018 15:34:37 +1100") Message-ID: <87d0sbpxmq.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1gBvlS-00058P-O9;;;mid=<87d0sbpxmq.fsf@xmission.com>;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=67.3.154.154;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX187yBQmaHOszZIJb6Q4yuAlBNofYw+F3JA= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.3.154.154 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the userns tree with the tip tree X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi all, > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 15:11:59 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in: >> >> arch/x86/mm/fault.c >> >> between commit: >> >> 164477c2331b ("x86/mm: Clarify hardware vs. software "error_code"") >> (and others from that series) >> >> from the tip tree and commits: >> >> 768fd9c69bb5 ("signal/x86: Remove pkey parameter from bad_area_nosemaphore") >> 25c102d803ea ("signal/x86: Remove pkey parameter from mm_fault_error") >> >> from the userns tree. >> >> I fixed it up (I think - 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 arch/x86/mm/fault.c >> index c2e3e5127ebc,8d77700a7883..000000000000 >> --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c >> +/* Handle faults in the user portion of the address space */ >> +static inline >> +void do_user_addr_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, >> + unsigned long hw_error_code, >> + unsigned long address) >> +{ >> + unsigned long sw_error_code; >> + struct vm_area_struct *vma; >> + struct task_struct *tsk; >> + struct mm_struct *mm; >> + vm_fault_t fault, major = 0; >> + unsigned int flags = FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY | FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE; >> + u32 pkey; > > I missed removing the above line. Yes. At first glance with the above change it looks like you got it. Eric