Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the y2038 tree (now block and tip trees)

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 6:22 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 14:10:27 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got conflicts in:
> >
> >   arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl
> >   arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
> >   include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
> >
> > between commits:
> >
> >   63a96220ad45 ("arch: add split IPC system calls where needed")
> >   0bd4bb9c5612 ("y2038: add 64-bit time_t syscalls to all 32-bit architectures")
> >
> > from the y2038 tree and commit:
> >
> >   3d2991bc7a67 ("signal: add pidfd_send_signal() syscall")
> >
> > from the pidfd tree.
>
> This is now a conflict between the block, tip and pidfd trees.  The
> resolution now looks like below.

Checked it again, still looks good. Thanks,

    Arnd