Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 27 May 2020 17:36:38 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     x86@kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: clean up and streamline probe_kernel_* and friends v4
Message-Id: <20200527173638.156eccece443d8e98c646310@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20200526061309.GA15549@lst.de>
References: <20200521152301.2587579-1-hch@lst.de>
        <20200525151912.34b20b978617e2893e484fa3@linux-foundation.org>
        <20200526061309.GA15549@lst.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 26 May 2020 08:13:09 +0200 Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:

> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 03:19:12PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > hm.  Applying linux-next to this series generates a lot of rejects against
> > powerpc:
> > 
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm  493 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/kernel/kgdb.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm 6461 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm  447 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm  623 May 25 15:06 arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c.rej
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 akpm akpm 1408 May 25 15:06 arch/riscv/kernel/patch.c.rej
> > 
> > the arch/powerpc/kernel/trace/ftrace.c ones aren't very trivial.
> > 
> > It's -rc7.  Perhaps we should park all this until 5.8-rc1?
> 
> As this is a pre-condition for the set_fs removal I'd really like to
> get the actual changes in.  All these conflicts seem to be about the
> last three cleanup patches just doing renaming, so can we just skip
> those three for now?  Then we can do the rename right after 5.8-rc1
> when we have the least chances for conflicts.

That seems to have worked.  "[PATCH 23/23] maccess: return -ERANGE when
copy_from_kernel_nofault_allowed fails" needed a bit of massaging to both
the patch and to the patch title.