linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the signal tree with the arm-current tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 5 Jul 2012 17:35:26 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the signal tree with the arm-current
 tree

Hi Al,

Today's linux-next merge of the signal tree got a conflict in
arch/arm/kernel/signal.c between commit f73e2ca64281 ("ARM: 7443/1:
Revert "new way of handling ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK"") from the arm-current
tree and commits 9c802c169f96 ("arm: deal with handlerless restarts
without leaving the kernel") and 76c3f4da3ee4 ("arm: get rid of
TIF_SYSCALL_RESTARTSYS") from the signal tree.

I have no idea how to cope with this.  So I have effectively reverted
commit f73e2ca64281 ("ARM: 7443/1: Revert "new way of handling
ERESTART_RESTARTBLOCK"") for today (though parts of that commit are also
implemented by the above signal tree commits).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped