[PATCH 1/2] kexec_file: Drop weak attribute from functions

[Naveen N. Rao]

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