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

[Shuah Khan]

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