From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Michael Neuling To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the signal tree with the powerpc tree In-reply-to: <1361425813.4676.47.camel@pasglop> References: <20130221155208.bcb1295ab9bdecf394d48bfc@canb.auug.org.au> <1361425813.4676.47.camel@pasglop> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:43:49 -0600 Message-ID: <27231.1361479429@ale.ozlabs.ibm.com> Cc: Stephen Rothwell , 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: , Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > 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. The merge looks fine to me. My TM signal tests still pass on next-20130221. Thanks sfr! Mikey