Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the keys tree

[Paul Moore]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 8:25 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,

Hello.

> > 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 include/linux/lsm_audit.h
> > index 734d67889826,99d629fd9944..000000000000
> > --- a/include/linux/lsm_audit.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/lsm_audit.h
> > @@@ -74,7 -74,7 +74,8 @@@ struct common_audit_data
> >   #define LSM_AUDIT_DATA_FILE 12
> >   #define LSM_AUDIT_DATA_IBPKEY       13
> >   #define LSM_AUDIT_DATA_IBENDPORT 14
> >  -#define LSM_AUDIT_DATA_LOCKDOWN 15
> >  +#define LSM_AUDIT_DATA_NOTIFICATION 15
> > ++#define LSM_AUDIT_DATA_LOCKDOWN 16
> >       union   {
> >               struct path path;
> >               struct dentry *dentry;
>
> This is now a conflict between the keys tree and Linus' tree.

Presumably it basically the same as above?  If so, it should be okay
to renumber the LSM_AUDIT_DATA_xxx defines as needed, they aren't
visible to userspace in any way, and really shouldn't be visible
outside of security/.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com