Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 06 Jul 2022 16:30:56 +0530 | From | "Naveen N. Rao" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] kexec_file: Drop weak attribute from functions |
| |
Hi Coiby,
Coiby Xu wrote: > Hi Baoquan and Naveen, > > On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 12:10:00PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: >>On 07/01/22 at 01:04pm, Naveen N. Rao wrote: >>> Drop __weak attribute from functions in kexec_file.c: >>> - arch_kexec_kernel_image_probe() >>> - arch_kimage_file_post_load_cleanup() >>> - arch_kexec_kernel_image_load() >>> - arch_kexec_locate_mem_hole() >>> - arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig() >>> >>> arch_kexec_kernel_image_load() calls into kexec_image_load_default(), so >>> drop the static attribute for the latter. >>> >>> arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig() is not overridden by any architecture, so >>> drop the __weak attribute. >> >>The dropping of arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig() conflicts with patch 1 of >>anotherpatchset, and the other patches in the patchset depends on the >>patch 1. >> >>[PATCH v9 0/4] unify the keyrings of arm64 and s390 with x86 to verify kexec'ed kernel signature >> >>Hi, Naveen, Coiby, >> >>Please negotiate how to solve the conflict. > > Thanks Baoquan for letting me know of this conflict. Naveen, how about > resolving the conflict based on which patch is merged first? If your > patch set is going to be merged early, I will resolve the conflict in my > patch set, and vice versa.
Sure, that's fair. It looks like Andrew has queued up this series though: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git/log/?h=mm-nonmm-unstable
The conflict itself is trivial, so it should be straightforward to address it.
Thanks, Naveen
| |