linux-next: manual merge of the loongarch tree with the asm-generic tree

Posted by Stephen Rothwell 1 year, 5 months ago

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the loongarch tree got a conflict in:

  arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h

between commits:

  13aa27ce8de0 ("clone3: drop __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3 macro")
  1d7b98ec5d78 ("loongarch: convert to generic syscall table")

from the asm-generic tree and commit:

  a5d43e6d87c0 ("LoongArch: Define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT in unistd.h")

from the loongarch tree.

I fixed it up (I think - 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
index 1f01980f9c94,b344b1f91715..000000000000
--- a/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
+++ b/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
@@@ -1,3 -1,6 +1,4 @@@
  /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
+ #define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
 -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE
 -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
  
 -#include <asm-generic/unistd.h>
 +#include <asm/unistd_64.h>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the loongarch tree with the asm-generic tree

Posted by Stephen Rothwell 1 year, 5 months ago

Hi all,

On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 10:01:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the loongarch tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> 
> between commits:
> 
>   13aa27ce8de0 ("clone3: drop __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3 macro")
>   1d7b98ec5d78 ("loongarch: convert to generic syscall table")
> 
> from the asm-generic tree and commit:
> 
>   a5d43e6d87c0 ("LoongArch: Define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT in unistd.h")
> 
> from the loongarch tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I think - 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.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> index 1f01980f9c94,b344b1f91715..000000000000
> --- a/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> +++ b/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> @@@ -1,3 -1,6 +1,4 @@@
>   /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
> + #define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
>  -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE
>  -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
>   
>  -#include <asm-generic/unistd.h>
>  +#include <asm/unistd_64.h>

This is now a conflict between the loongarch tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the loongarch tree with the asm-generic tree

Posted by Arnd Bergmann 1 year, 5 months ago

On Tue, Jul 9, 2024, at 02:01, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the loongarch tree got a conflict in:
>
>   arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
>
> between commits:
>
>   13aa27ce8de0 ("clone3: drop __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3 macro")
>   1d7b98ec5d78 ("loongarch: convert to generic syscall table")
>
> from the asm-generic tree and commit:
>
>   a5d43e6d87c0 ("LoongArch: Define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT in unistd.h")
>
> from the loongarch tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I think - 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.

Thanks for taking care of it. There is a slightly better way
to do it though:

> diff --cc arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> index 1f01980f9c94,b344b1f91715..000000000000
> --- a/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> +++ b/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> @@@ -1,3 -1,6 +1,4 @@@
>   /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
> + #define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
>  -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE
>  -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
>  

The macro is no longer needed in the uapi header and
should now be included in arch/loongarch/include/asm/unistd.h
instead.

      Arnd

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the loongarch tree with the asm-generic tree

Posted by Stephen Rothwell 1 year, 5 months ago

Hi all,

On Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:00:56 +0200 "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2024, at 02:01, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the loongarch tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> >
> > between commits:
> >
> >   13aa27ce8de0 ("clone3: drop __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3 macro")
> >   1d7b98ec5d78 ("loongarch: convert to generic syscall table")
> >
> > from the asm-generic tree and commit:
> >
> >   a5d43e6d87c0 ("LoongArch: Define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT in unistd.h")
> >
> > from the loongarch tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I think - 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.  
> 
> Thanks for taking care of it. There is a slightly better way
> to do it though:
> 
> > diff --cc arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> > index 1f01980f9c94,b344b1f91715..000000000000
> > --- a/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> > +++ b/arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h
> > @@@ -1,3 -1,6 +1,4 @@@
> >   /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
> > + #define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
> >  -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE
> >  -#define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
> >    
> 
> The macro is no longer needed in the uapi header and
> should now be included in arch/loongarch/include/asm/unistd.h
> instead.

OK, so I have removed the __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT line from my resolution
of arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h and applied the following
merge fix patch:

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 11:25:28 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "LoongArch: Define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT in unistd.h"

interacting with "loongarch: convert to generic syscall table"

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
---
 arch/loongarch/include/asm/unistd.h | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/unistd.h b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/unistd.h
index fc0a481a7416..e2c0f3d86c7b 100644
--- a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/unistd.h
+++ b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/unistd.h
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
 
 #include <uapi/asm/unistd.h>
 
+#define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
 #define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE
 
 #define NR_syscalls (__NR_syscalls)
-- 
2.43.0

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell