Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the powerpc-fixes tree
Christian Brauner writes:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 09:17:30PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Stephen Rothwell 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
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the powerpc-fixes tree
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 09:17:30PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell 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.
>
> Thanks.
>
> I thought the week between rc1 and rc2 would be a safe time to do that
> conversion of the syscall table, but I guess I was wrong :)
:)
>
> 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. :)
Thanks!
Christian
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the powerpc-fixes tree
Stephen Rothwell 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.
Thanks.
I thought the week between rc1 and rc2 would be a safe time to do that
conversion of the syscall table, but I guess I was wrong :)
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.
cheers
> diff --cc arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
> index c0cdaacd770e,dd87a782d80e..
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
> @@@ -480,6 -524,8 +480,7 @@@
> 434 common pidfd_open sys_pidfd_open
> 435 32 clone3 ppc_clone3
> sys_clone3
> 435 64 clone3 sys_clone3
> -435 spu clone3 sys_ni_syscall
> + 436 common close_range sys_close_range
> 437 common openat2 sys_openat2
> 438 common pidfd_getfd sys_pidfd_getfd
> 439 common faccessat2 sys_faccessat2
linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the powerpc-fixes tree
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.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
index c0cdaacd770e,dd87a782d80e..
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl
@@@ -480,6 -524,8 +480,7 @@@
434 common pidfd_open sys_pidfd_open
435 32 clone3 ppc_clone3
sys_clone3
435 64 clone3 sys_clone3
-435 spu clone3 sys_ni_syscall
+ 436 common close_range sys_close_range
437 common openat2 sys_openat2
438 common pidfd_getfd sys_pidfd_getfd
439 common faccessat2 sys_faccessat2
pgpJFrDUQM9cx.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
