Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Date | Wed, 13 Feb 2019 13:57:51 +0100 | Subject | Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the y2038 tree (now block and tip trees) |
| |
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 6:22 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 14:10:27 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got conflicts in: > > > > arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl > > arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl > > include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h > > > > between commits: > > > > 63a96220ad45 ("arch: add split IPC system calls where needed") > > 0bd4bb9c5612 ("y2038: add 64-bit time_t syscalls to all 32-bit architectures") > > > > from the y2038 tree and commit: > > > > 3d2991bc7a67 ("signal: add pidfd_send_signal() syscall") > > > > from the pidfd tree. > > This is now a conflict between the block, tip and pidfd trees. The > resolution now looks like below.
Checked it again, still looks good. Thanks,
Arnd
| |