Messages in this thread | | | From | Michael Ellerman <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the powerpc-fixes tree | Date | Tue, 23 Jun 2020 21:42:45 +1000 |
| |
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> writes: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 09:17:30PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> writes: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in: >> > >> > arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl >> > >> > between commit: >> > >> > 35e32a6cb5f6 ("powerpc/syscalls: Split SPU-ness out of ABI") >> > >> > from the powerpc-fixes tree and commit: >> > >> > 9b4feb630e8e ("arch: wire-up close_range()") >> > >> > from the pidfd 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. ... >> >> I'm planning to send those changes to Linus for rc2, so the conflict >> will then be vs mainline. But I guess it's pretty trivial so it doesn't >> really matter. > > close_range() is targeted for the v5.9 merge window. I always do > test-merges with mainline at the time I'm creating a pr and I'll just > mention to Linus that there's conflict with ppc. :)
I ended up dropping the patch, so there shouldn't be a conflict anymore.
cheers
| |