From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32E482C007E for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:50:23 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <1361425813.4676.47.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the signal tree with the powerpc tree From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Stephen Rothwell Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 23:50:13 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20130221155208.bcb1295ab9bdecf394d48bfc@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20130221155208.bcb1295ab9bdecf394d48bfc@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Michael Neuling , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , Al Viro , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2013-02-21 at 15:52 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Al, > > Today's linux-next merge of the signal tree got conflicts in > arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c and arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_64.c > between commit 2b0a576d15e0 ("powerpc: Add new transactional memory state > to the signal context") from the powerpc tree and commit 7cce246557bf > ("powerpc: switch to generic sigaltstack") from the signal tree. > > I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary > (no action is required). Mikey, can you check everything's all right ? I'm happy to wait for Al stuff to go in first & fixup the conflict before I send the pull request to Linus. I'm off travelling around but I should be able to get stuff out this week-end. Cheers, Ben.