From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the signal tree with the modules tree Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:26:54 +1030 Message-ID: <87vc8psey1.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <20130314172737.2856af8a9b368bc395d977be@canb.auug.org.au> <87li9ptgtq.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:35689 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750913Ab3CRCpU (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Mar 2013 22:45:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Al Viro , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sedat Dilek writes: > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Rusty Russell wrote: >> Stephen Rothwell writes: >>> Hi Al, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the signal tree got a conflict in >>> include/asm-generic/unistd.h between commit 837718bfd28b >>> ("CONFIG_SYMBOL_PREFIX: cleanup") from the modules tree and commit >>> e1b5bb6d1236 ("consolidate cond_syscall and SYSCALL_ALIAS declarations") >>> from the signal tree. >>> >>> The latter moved the cond_syscall stuff to linkage.h, so I applied the >>> following patch as a merge fixup and can carry the fix as necessary (no >>> action is required). I am not sure if this is completely correct or all >>> that is needed. >> >> Your fix looks correct, thanks. >> >> I've been forced to update that patch after another round of >> improvements, so you may need to re-do the merge. >> > > Hi, > > I just looked into modules-next... > The improved version is in [1]... > ...and contains a file called "kernel/modsign_certificate.S" which is > NOT in the latest Linux-Next tree [2]. > So, I thought about reverting the one in -next and apply the new one > from modules-next. > This is not possible! I'd wait until Stephen has done the new merge, which should happen within 12 hours from now. Thanks, Rusty.