* Dominik Brodowski <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 01:03:54PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Dominik Brodowski <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > The whole series is available at > > > > > > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brodo/linux.git syscalls-WIP > > > > > > > > BTW., I'd like all these bits to go through the x86 tree. > > > > > > > > What is the expected merge route of the generic preparatory bits? > > > > > > My current plan is to push the 109 patch bomb to remove in-kernel calls to syscalls > > > directly to Linus once v4.16 is released. > > > > Are there any (textual and semantic) conflicts with the latest -next? > > > > Also, to what extent were these 109 patches tested in -next? > > These 109 patches are equivalent to the syscalls tree in linux-next. Most of > these patches habe been in there for quite a while (the last major batch went > in on March 22; other patches are in there since March 14th). > > Conflicts existend with asm-generic and metag (which contain remvoal of some > architectures; I have solved that issue by not caring about those archs any > more); trivial conflicts exist since very few days with the vfs and sparc > trees. Ok, great - all that sounds good to me, and I'll integrate the x86 bits once the generic bits are upstream. Thanks, Ingo
