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 1271FC4332F for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238832AbiLNSjK (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2022 13:39:10 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52862 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238843AbiLNSjE (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2022 13:39:04 -0500 Received: from smtp-relay-canonical-1.canonical.com (smtp-relay-canonical-1.canonical.com [185.125.188.121]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1E4F2A727; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 10:39:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.192.83] (unknown [50.47.134.245]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay-canonical-1.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 748EC435AA; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:38:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canonical.com; s=20210705; t=1671043140; bh=mn7RH9Ufp845DGISODvcJfPEAYPED21Nvkh3xrhQ8w8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=uFQoT+m7osjRCGAF1wpbjEQR2NY71VIfimTF4a+zuVs5Z++dwc2XHtVySnWNAvGsw RkDcRG1ozPRtPIrcK/dxUwLAmczggIScYwJJcqvEo1q3YbPELu6WvJYM3lroIW4ARf NsbsdCROrdI+MB/iOG7uMOTvjYR48RMNimsvpuRo+zcJ0o/q8ABXeL+s06rDfdRLmi bLh/mNXWhfxU30cec8G5MaDn0EWFtjcRPAVnpV8wvTQrfmkyrLAU2rCWynfGdoQxgn eRsp0qY0ni021lDLJfqHYbmbAMGSQ3sdf2bV/5bobKqAvZUh+1/HpSSZakg67XE9CY s72cOOGinjgoA== Message-ID: <1854ad9a-c31d-3fea-b9d3-b81ff6a29230@canonical.com> Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 10:38:57 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kunit-next tree with the apparmor tree Content-Language: en-US To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Shuah Khan , Brendan Higgins , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Rae Moar References: <20221208124653.71ba9491@canb.auug.org.au> <20221214105830.3bde0179@canb.auug.org.au> From: John Johansen Organization: Canonical In-Reply-To: <20221214105830.3bde0179@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/13/22 15:58, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 12:46:53 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the kunit-next tree got a conflict in: >> >> security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c >> >> between commits: >> >> 371e50a0b19f ("apparmor: make unpack_array return a trianary value") >> 32490541682b ("apparmor: Fix kunit test for out of bounds array") >> >> from the apparmor tree and commit: >> >> 2c92044683f5 ("apparmor: test: make static symbols visible during kunit testing") >> >> from the kunit-next 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 security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c >> index 7465da42492d,f25cf2a023d5..000000000000 >> --- a/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c >> +++ b/security/apparmor/policy_unpack_test.c >> @@@ -144,8 -147,8 +147,8 @@@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_a >> >> puf->e->pos += TEST_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET; >> >> - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, unpack_array(puf->e, NULL, &array_size), >> - array_size = aa_unpack_array(puf->e, NULL); >> - >> ++ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, aa_unpack_array(puf->e, NULL, &array_size), >> + TRI_TRUE); >> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, array_size, (u16)TEST_ARRAY_SIZE); >> KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, >> puf->e->start + TEST_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET + sizeof(u16) + 1); >> @@@ -159,8 -162,8 +162,8 @@@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_a >> >> puf->e->pos += TEST_NAMED_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET; >> >> - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, unpack_array(puf->e, name, &array_size), >> - array_size = aa_unpack_array(puf->e, name); >> - >> ++ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, aa_unpack_array(puf->e, name, &array_size), >> + TRI_TRUE); >> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, array_size, (u16)TEST_ARRAY_SIZE); >> KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, >> puf->e->start + TEST_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET + sizeof(u16) + 1); >> @@@ -175,8 -178,9 +178,8 @@@ static void policy_unpack_test_unpack_a >> puf->e->pos += TEST_NAMED_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET; >> puf->e->end = puf->e->start + TEST_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET + sizeof(u16); >> >> - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, unpack_array(puf->e, name, &array_size), >> - array_size = aa_unpack_array(puf->e, name); >> - >> - KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, array_size, 0); >> ++ KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, aa_unpack_array(puf->e, name, &array_size), >> + TRI_FALSE); >> KUNIT_EXPECT_PTR_EQ(test, puf->e->pos, >> puf->e->start + TEST_NAMED_ARRAY_BUF_OFFSET); >> } > > This is now a conflict between the apparmor tree and Linus' tree. > sorry for the delay on this, build and regression testing took way longer than they should have. apparmor merge request is now sent