* Dominik Brodowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 01:03:54PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Dominik Brodowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > The whole series is available at
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/brodo/linux.git
> > > > > syscalls-WIP
> > > >
> > > > BTW., I'd like all these bits to go through the x86 tree.
> > > >
> > > > What is the expected merge route of the generic preparatory bits?
> > >
> > > My current plan is to push the 109 patch bomb to remove in-kernel calls
> > > to syscalls
> > > directly to Linus once v4.16 is released.
> >
> > Are there any (textual and semantic) conflicts with the latest -next?
> >
> > Also, to what extent were these 109 patches tested in -next?
>
> These 109 patches are equivalent to the syscalls tree in linux-next. Most of
> these patches habe been in there for quite a while (the last major batch went
> in on March 22; other patches are in there since March 14th).
>
> Conflicts existend with asm-generic and metag (which contain remvoal of some
> architectures; I have solved that issue by not caring about those archs any
> more); trivial conflicts exist since very few days with the vfs and sparc
> trees.
Ok, great - all that sounds good to me, and I'll integrate the x86 bits once
the
generic bits are upstream.
Thanks,
Ingo
