Hi all,
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 10:23:30 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xtensa tree got a conflict in:
>
> tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 469023465e79 ("sh: Add SECCOMP_FILTER")
>
> from the sh tree and commit:
>
> deccfc9ce639 ("selftests/seccomp: add xtensa support")
>
> from the xtensa tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>
> diff --cc tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> index 06d994a34997,1b445c2e7fbe..000000000000
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
> @@@ -124,8 -122,8 +124,10 @@@ struct seccomp_data
> # define __NR_seccomp 358
> # elif defined(__s390__)
> # define __NR_seccomp 348
> +# elif defined(__sh__)
> +# define __NR_seccomp 372
> + # elif defined(__xtensa__)
> + # define __NR_seccomp 337
> # else
> # warning "seccomp syscall number unknown for this architecture"
> # define __NR_seccomp 0xffff
> @@@ -1634,10 -1624,14 +1636,18 @@@ TEST_F(TRACE_poke, getpid_runs_normally
> # define SYSCALL_SYSCALL_NUM regs[4]
> # define SYSCALL_RET regs[2]
> # define SYSCALL_NUM_RET_SHARE_REG
> +#elif defined(__sh__)
> +# define ARCH_REGS struct pt_regs
> +# define SYSCALL_NUM gpr[3]
> +# define SYSCALL_RET gpr[0]
> + #elif defined(__xtensa__)
> + # define ARCH_REGS struct user_pt_regs
> + # define SYSCALL_NUM syscall
> + /*
> + * On xtensa syscall return value is in the register
> + * a2 of the current window which is not fixed.
> + */
> + #define SYSCALL_RET(reg) a[(reg).windowbase * 4 + 2]
> #else
> # error "Do not know how to find your architecture's registers and syscalls"
> #endif
> @@@ -1710,7 -1704,7 +1720,7 @@@ void change_syscall(struct __test_metad
>
> #if defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__i386__) || defined(__powerpc__) || \
> defined(__s390__) || defined(__hppa__) || defined(__riscv) || \
> - defined(__csky__) || defined(__sh__)
> - defined(__xtensa__)
> ++ defined(__csky__) || defined(__sh__) || defined(__xtensa__)
> {
> regs.SYSCALL_NUM = syscall;
> }
This is now a conflict between the sh tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgpJOC6japRNg.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
