lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: clean up and streamline probe_kernel_* and friends v4
On Tue, 26 May 2020 08:13:09 +0200 Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:

> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 03:19:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > hm. Applying linux-next to this series generates a lot of rejects against
> > powerpc:
> >
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm 493 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/kernel/kgdb.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm 6461 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm 447 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm 623 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm 1408 May 25 15:06 arch/riscv/kernel/patch.c.rej
> >
> > the arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c ones aren't very trivial.
> >
> > It's -rc7. Perhaps we should park all this until 5.8-rc1?
>
> As this is a pre-condition for the set_fs removal I'd really like to
> get the actual changes in. All these conflicts seem to be about the
> last three cleanup patches just doing renaming, so can we just skip
> those three for now? Then we can do the rename right after 5.8-rc1
> when we have the least chances for conflicts.

That seems to have worked. "[PATCH 23/23] maccess: return -ERANGE when
copy_from_kernel_nofault_allowed fails" needed a bit of massaging to both
the patch and to the patch title.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-28 02:37    [W:0.054 / U:1.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site