Re: linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the vfs tree

2016-01-04 Thread Mimi Zohar
On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 16:23 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Mimi, > > On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:06:37 -0500 Mimi Zohar > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 03:16 +, Al Viro wrote: > > > > > > FWIW, I'm going to pull the part that introduces memdup_user_nul() into > > > a never-rebased bra

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the vfs tree

2016-01-03 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi Mimi, On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:06:37 -0500 Mimi Zohar wrote: > > On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 03:16 +, Al Viro wrote: > > > > FWIW, I'm going to pull the part that introduces memdup_user_nul() into > > a never-rebased branch and if security.git is willing to pull it and handle > > that conversion i

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the vfs tree

2016-01-03 Thread Mimi Zohar
On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 03:16 +, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 01:52:21PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the integrity tree got a conflict in: > > > > security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 3bc8f29b149e ("

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the vfs tree

2016-01-03 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 01:52:21PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the integrity tree got a conflict in: > > security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c > > between commit: > > 3bc8f29b149e ("new helper: memdup_user_nul()") > > from the vfs tree and commit: >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the vfs tree

2016-01-03 Thread Stephen Rothwell
[Just cc'ing the security tree maintainer, since this will soon be in his tree and is related to a conflict between that tree and the vfs tree.] On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 13:52:21 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the integrity tree got a conflict in: > > sec