linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:10:17 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@...wei.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:

  include/linux/bpf.h

between commit:

  1f6e04a1c7b8 ("bpf: Fix offset calculation error in __copy_map_value and zero_map_value")

from the net tree and commit:

  e5feed0f64f7 ("bpf: Fix copy_map_value, zero_map_value")

from the bpf-next tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the latter) 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped