[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190408171534.GA11717@altlinux.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 20:15:34 +0300
From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with Linus' tree
On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 11:31:31AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the audit tree got conflicts in:
>
> arch/mips/kernel/ptrace.c
> kernel/seccomp.c
>
> between commit:
>
> b35f549df1d7 ("syscalls: Remove start and number from syscall_get_arguments() args")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 16add411645c ("syscall_get_arch: add "struct task_struct *" argument")
>
> from the audit 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.
Thanks, the merge fix is correct.
I've also re-tested it using the new selftests/ptrace test
from PTRACE_GET_SYSCALL_INFO patchset.
--
ldv
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists