On Tue, 21 May 2013 14:29:48 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in
> arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd ("arm: bpf_jit: can
> call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit
> "bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation" from the
> akpm tree.
>
> The former means that the latter is no longer required, so I used the
> former and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
Yes, there have been a lot of conflicts in
seccomp-add-generic-code-for-jitted-seccomp-filters.patch
arm-net-bpf_jit-make-code-generation-less-dependent-on-struct-sk_filter.patch
arm-net-bpf_jit-make-code-generation-less-dependent-on-struct-sk_filter-fixup-merge-conflict.patch
arm-net-bpf_jit-add-support-for-jitted-seccomp-filters.patch
recently and I'm presently seeing a compilation error.
Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the versions
which I presently have. Please refresh, retest and resend when
convenient? It'll need to be against linux-next, which is where the
conflicting (vfree/module_free) changes have occurred.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
