Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with Linus' tree

From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the audit tree with Linus' tree
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 20:15:34 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190408171534.GA11717@altlinux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190408113131.222f480a@canb.auug.org.au>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1006 bytes --]

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

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]