netdev - Re: [PATCH] selftests: bpf: update .gitignore with missing file

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

Message-ID: <065a8bc2-6065-3d43-8b03-35ed693de7ce@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Tue, 24 Apr 2018 00:31:42 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
Cc:     ast@...nel.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: bpf: update .gitignore with missing file

On 04/24/2018 12:14 AM, Anders Roxell wrote:
> On 23 April 2018 at 23:34, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>> On 04/23/2018 03:50 PM, Anders Roxell wrote:
>>> Fixes: c0fa1b6c3efc ("bpf: btf: Add BTF tests")
>>> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore | 1 +
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore
>>> index 5e1ab2f0eb79..3e3b3ced3f7c 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore
>>> @@ -15,3 +15,4 @@ test_libbpf_open
>>>  test_sock
>>>  test_sock_addr
>>>  urandom_read
>>> +test_btf
>>
>> Against which tree is this? This doesn't apply to bpf-next. It would
>> apply against bpf tree, but c0fa1b6c3efc ("bpf: btf: Add BTF tests")
>> is part of bpf-next, so fits to neither of them.
> 
> I'm sorry,
> 
> I did it against this patch [1] that I thought was already applied to
> the bpf tree.

That was bpf tree since the original change already went to mainline; the
BTF is in bpf-next however, so you need to rebase your change against that.

Thanks,
Daniel