Re: linux-next: manual merge of the seccomp tree with the kselftest tree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 8/4/20 11:45 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,

On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 15:59:17 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the seccomp tree got a conflict in:

   tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c

between commit:

   4c6614dc86ad ("selftests/seccomp: Check ENOSYS under tracing")

from the kselftest tree and commit:

   11eb004ef7ea ("selftests/seccomp: Check ENOSYS under tracing")

from the seccomp tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the latter version) and can carry the fix as
necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider
cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
particularly complex conflicts.

This is now a conflict between the kselftest tree and Linus' tree.


This is sorted out. I added a note to my pull request.

thanks,
-- Shuah



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux USB Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux