netdev - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with Linus' 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, 23 Mar 2017 17:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ast@...com, kafai@...com
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with Linus' tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:14 +1100

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   8c290e60fa2a ("bpf: fix hashmap extra_elems logic")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   bcc6b1b7ebf8 ("bpf: Add hash of maps support")
> 
> 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 did the same resolution just an hour ago when merging net into
net-next.

Thanks!