netdev - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the netfilter tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2016 01:31:17 +0100
From:   Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        NetFilter <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the netfilter
 tree

Hi David,

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:56:33AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   8fbfef7f505b ("ipvs: use IPVS_CMD_ATTR_MAX for family.maxattr")
> 
> from the netfilter tree and commit:
> 
>   489111e5c25b ("genetlink: statically initialize families")
> 
> from the net-next tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (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.

I think I cannot help to address this conflict myself.

8fbfef7f505b is in my nf tree, while 489111e5c25b is in net-next. So
you will hit this conflict by when you pull net into net-next.

So please keep this patch from Stephen to resolve the conflict in your
radar to solve this.

Or let me know if you come up with any way I can handle this from here
to reduce your burden. Thanks.

> diff --cc net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c
> index a6e44ef2ec9a,6b85ded4f91d..000000000000
> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c
> @@@ -3872,10 -3865,20 +3865,20 @@@ static const struct genl_ops ip_vs_genl
>   	},
>   };
>   
> + static struct genl_family ip_vs_genl_family __ro_after_init = {
> + 	.hdrsize	= 0,
> + 	.name		= IPVS_GENL_NAME,
> + 	.version	= IPVS_GENL_VERSION,
>  -	.maxattr	= IPVS_CMD_MAX,
> ++	.maxattr	= IPVS_CMD_ATTR_MAX,
> + 	.netnsok        = true,         /* Make ipvsadm to work on netns */
> + 	.module		= THIS_MODULE,
> + 	.ops		= ip_vs_genl_ops,
> + 	.n_ops		= ARRAY_SIZE(ip_vs_genl_ops),
> + };
> + 
>   static int __init ip_vs_genl_register(void)
>   {
> - 	return genl_register_family_with_ops(&ip_vs_genl_family,
> - 					     ip_vs_genl_ops);
> + 	return genl_register_family(&ip_vs_genl_family);
>   }
>   
>   static void ip_vs_genl_unregister(void)