linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the rdma 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]

Message-ID: <20180727024832.GA30023@mellanox.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 Jul 2018 20:48:32 -0600
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Parav Pandit <parav@...lanox.com>,
        Ursula Braun <ubraun@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the rdma tree

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 12:33:01PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> I fixed it up (I wasn't sure how to fix this up as so much has changed
> in the net-next tree and both modified functions had been (re)moved,
> so I effectively reverted the rdma tree commit) and can carry the fix
> as necessary.  Please come to some arrangement about this.

How does that still compile? We removed ib_query_gid() from the rdma
tree and replaced it with rdma_get_gid_attr()..

I think the merge resolution is going to be a bit nasty to absorb
that much changing..

Perhaps we should add a compatability ib_query_gid back to the RDMA
tree and then send DaveM a commit to fix SMC and remove it during the
next cycle? Linus can resolve smc_ib.c by using the net version

Does someone else have a better idea?

Thanks,
Jason