linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the mm-nonmm-unstable tree

Posted by Stephen Rothwell 9 months, 1 week ago

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the integrity tree got a conflict in:

  kernel/kexec_file.c

between commit:

  912e32afb858 ("kexec_file: use SHA-256 library API instead of crypto_shash API")

from the mm-nonmm-unstable tree and commit:

  9ee8888a80fe ("ima: kexec: skip IMA segment validation after kexec soft reboot")

from the integrity 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 kernel/kexec_file.c
index ac915eabb901,0adb645072aa..000000000000
--- a/kernel/kexec_file.c
+++ b/kernel/kexec_file.c
@@@ -762,7 -800,17 +786,14 @@@ static int kexec_calculate_store_digest
  		if (ksegment->kbuf == pi->purgatory_buf)
  			continue;
  
+ 		/*
+ 		 * Skip the segment if ima_segment_index is set and matches
+ 		 * the current index
+ 		 */
+ 		if (check_ima_segment_index(image, i))
+ 			continue;
+ 
 -		ret = crypto_shash_update(desc, ksegment->kbuf,
 -					  ksegment->bufsz);
 -		if (ret)
 -			break;
 +		sha256_update(&state, ksegment->kbuf, ksegment->bufsz);
  
  		/*
  		 * Assume rest of the buffer is filled with zero and

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the mm-nonmm-unstable tree

Posted by Stephen Rothwell 8 months, 2 weeks ago

Hi all,

On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:23:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the integrity tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   kernel/kexec_file.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   912e32afb858 ("kexec_file: use SHA-256 library API instead of crypto_shash API")
> 
> from the mm-nonmm-unstable tree and commit:
> 
>   9ee8888a80fe ("ima: kexec: skip IMA segment validation after kexec soft reboot")
> 
> from the integrity 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 kernel/kexec_file.c
> index ac915eabb901,0adb645072aa..000000000000
> --- a/kernel/kexec_file.c
> +++ b/kernel/kexec_file.c
> @@@ -762,7 -800,17 +786,14 @@@ static int kexec_calculate_store_digest
>   		if (ksegment->kbuf == pi->purgatory_buf)
>   			continue;
>   
> + 		/*
> + 		 * Skip the segment if ima_segment_index is set and matches
> + 		 * the current index
> + 		 */
> + 		if (check_ima_segment_index(image, i))
> + 			continue;
> + 
>  -		ret = crypto_shash_update(desc, ksegment->kbuf,
>  -					  ksegment->bufsz);
>  -		if (ret)
>  -			break;
>  +		sha256_update(&state, ksegment->kbuf, ksegment->bufsz);
>   
>   		/*
>   		 * Assume rest of the buffer is filled with zero and

This is now a conflict between the mm-nonmm-stable tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the integrity tree with the mm-nonmm-unstable tree

Posted by Mimi Zohar 8 months, 1 week ago

On Thu, 2025-05-29 at 14:27 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:23:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> wrote:
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the integrity tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >    kernel/kexec_file.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >    912e32afb858 ("kexec_file: use SHA-256 library API instead of
> > crypto_shash API")
> > 
> > from the mm-nonmm-unstable tree and commit:
> > 
> >    9ee8888a80fe ("ima: kexec: skip IMA segment validation after kexec soft
> > reboot")
> > 
> > from the integrity 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 kernel/kexec_file.c
> > index ac915eabb901,0adb645072aa..000000000000
> > --- a/kernel/kexec_file.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kexec_file.c
> > @@@ -762,7 -800,17 +786,14 @@@ static int kexec_calculate_store_digest
> >    		if (ksegment->kbuf == pi->purgatory_buf)
> >    			continue;
> >    
> > + 		/*
> > + 		 * Skip the segment if ima_segment_index is set and matches
> > + 		 * the current index
> > + 		 */
> > + 		if (check_ima_segment_index(image, i))
> > + 			continue;
> > + 
> >   -		ret = crypto_shash_update(desc, ksegment->kbuf,
> >   -					  ksegment->bufsz);
> >   -		if (ret)
> >   -			break;
> >   +		sha256_update(&state, ksegment->kbuf, ksegment->bufsz);
> >    
> >    		/*
> >    		 * Assume rest of the buffer is filled with zero and
> 
> This is now a conflict between the mm-nonmm-stable tree and Linus' tree.

Thanks Stephen.  It looks good to me.

Mimi