On 05/04, Roland McGrath wrote: > > I guess I'm slightly confused. Me too ;)
> We want to merge all of the "pure" ptrace > cleanup patches before any utrace patch. Yes, exactly! The second patch "ptrace: do not use task_lock() for attach" has nothing to do with utrace, and it is really pure ptrace cleanup. But it can't be applied to -mm tree, because it (textually) conficts with utrace changes in ptrace_attach(). > When those are on their way, > we'll update the utrace patches not to conflict. I don't think it makes > sense to include utrace.patch's little ptrace.c change in the baseline tree > for your ptrace cleanup patches. Yes, but in this case, how can we push it before utrace-core.patch ? The first patch is only for -mm, to avoid the painful dependencies. Since you seem to mostly agree with the second patch, what should I do? Oleg.