[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d2f5f50e-4e32-4ec9-8417-b617c26e3815@t-8ch.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 21:34:45 +0200
From: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas@...ch.de>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: duplicate patch in the nolibc tree
On 2023-08-17 12:27:46-0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 8/17/23 10:30, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > On 2023-08-17 13:38:11+1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > The following commit is also in the vfs-brauner tree as a different commit
> > > (but the same patch):
> > >
> > > ba859b2e419c ("selftests/nolibc: drop test chmod_net")
> > >
> > > This is commit
> > >
> > > 49319832de90 ("selftests/nolibc: drop test chmod_net")
> > >
> > > in the vfs-brauner tree.
> >
> > I think we can drop the patch from the nolibc tree.
> > The patch is only really necessary in combination with
> > commit 18e66ae67673 ("proc: use generic setattr() for /proc/$PID/net")
> > which already is and should stay in the vfs tree.
>
> Thomas,
>
> Do the rest of the nolibc patches build without this if we were
> to drop this patch? Dorpping requires rebase and please see below.
Yes, this patch is completely independent.
It only interacts with the mentioned commit in the vfs tree.
> [..]
Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists