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:   Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:48:57 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <>,
        Stephen Rothwell <>
Cc:     David Miller <>,
        Networking <>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the bpf tree

On 02/20/2019 01:41 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:37 PM Stephen Rothwell <> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
>> between commit:
>>   f6be4d16039b ("selftests/bpf: make sure signal interrupts BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN")
> Ouch. Thanks for the heads up.
> Daniel,
> should we drop this one from bpf tree ?
> I don't think it's strictly necessary.

Yeah no objections, lets move the selftest one over to bpf-next and
have it properly integrated. I think test_progs might potentially need
further topic-split aside from kernel progs like we did in test_verifier.

>> from the bpf tree and commits:
>>   bf0f0fd93945 ("selftests/bpf: add simple BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN examples for flow dissector")
>>   ab963beb9f5d ("selftests/bpf: add bpf_spin_lock C test")
>>   ba72a7b4badb ("selftests/bpf: test for BPF_F_LOCK")

Powered by blists - more mailing lists