Hi David, If patches from integrity/next-trusted-keys goes via your tree, then I suggest that you re-base your patches on the top of our patchset, because it is unclear how long review of PE, PKCS7 patches will take and if they will be pulled...
I would do it with different pull requests. - Dmitry On 10/07/14 00:29, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 19:56 +0100, David Howells wrote: >> Mimi Zohar <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yes, that's fine. My concern, however, is that the trusted keyring >>> patches are independent of the other patches being upstreamed and should >>> be upstreamed regardless of the other patches. >> There is overlap in the X.509 certificate request function that you took from >> my pkcs#7 patches. > Right, x509_request_asymmetric_key() is the same as > pkcs7_request_asymmetric_key(). > > Mimi > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe > linux-security-module" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
