Hi Michael, On 10/5/22 13:37, Michael Schmitz wrote:
Hi Stephen, apologies on my part - I had thought that I had copied in Greg on my patch series. And I evidently missed that his ELF patch would have clashed with mine.
You definitely did, I still have your patches in my inbox too :-)
Geert and Greg coordinate well as a rule, and both patches had been seen on the linux-m68k mailing list (just too far apart to jog my memory).
Yeah, this was really an accident of timing between Geert applying your series to his for-next branch, and me applying the regset changes to my for-next branch. The two changes are quite distinct, but they overlap in location within ptrace.c file. The fixup patch is pretty strait forward, and Stephen has that right. Regards Greg
Won't happen again this decade (I hope). Cheers, Michael Am 10.05.2022 um 11:44 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in: arch/m68k/kernel/ptrace.c between commit: c862fe70b023 ("m68k: Wire up syscall_trace_enter/leave for m68k") from the m68k tree and commit: 0d91043d8bdf ("m68knommu: implement minimal regset support") from the m68knommu 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.
