netdev - linux-next: manual merge of the net-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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20170131122303.5a5bb47a@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:23:03 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree

Hi all,

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

  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c

between commit:

  3e621b19b0bb ("net/mlx5e: Support TC encapsulation offloads with upper devices")

from the net tree and commits:

  75c33da82736 ("net/mlx5e: TC ipv4 tunnel encap offload cosmetic changes")
  9a941117fb76 ("net/mlx5e: Maximize ip tunnel key usage on the TC offloading path")

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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c
index c5282b6aba8b,640f10f2e994..000000000000
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c
@@@ -660,13 -684,10 +684,11 @@@ static int mlx5e_route_lookup_ipv4(stru
  				   struct net_device **out_dev,
  				   struct flowi4 *fl4,
  				   struct neighbour **out_n,
- 				   __be32 *saddr,
  				   int *out_ttl)
  {
 +	struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = priv->mdev->priv.eswitch;
  	struct rtable *rt;
  	struct neighbour *n = NULL;
- 	int ttl;
  
  #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INET)
  	int ret;
@@@ -678,21 -699,21 +700,19 @@@
  #else
  	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
  #endif
 -
 -	if (!switchdev_port_same_parent_id(priv->netdev, rt->dst.dev)) {
 -		pr_warn("%s: can't offload, devices not on same HW e-switch\n", __func__);
 -		ip_rt_put(rt);
 -		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 -	}
 +	/* if the egress device isn't on the same HW e-switch, we use the uplink */
 +	if (!switchdev_port_same_parent_id(priv->netdev, rt->dst.dev))
 +		*out_dev = mlx5_eswitch_get_uplink_netdev(esw);
 +	else
 +		*out_dev = rt->dst.dev;
  
- 	ttl = ip4_dst_hoplimit(&rt->dst);
+ 	*out_ttl = ip4_dst_hoplimit(&rt->dst);
  	n = dst_neigh_lookup(&rt->dst, &fl4->daddr);
  	ip_rt_put(rt);
  	if (!n)
  		return -ENOMEM;
  
  	*out_n = n;
- 	*saddr = fl4->saddr;
- 	*out_ttl = ttl;
 -	*out_dev = rt->dst.dev;
  
  	return 0;
  }