netdev - Re: 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <df699947253913a7e572fd1252b99e594431e261.camel@debian.org>
Date:   Wed, 27 Mar 2019 09:26:02 +0000
From:   Luca Boccassi <bluca@...ian.org>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net tree

On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 18:56 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 09:14:37AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   tools/lib/bpf/Makefile
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   1d382264d911 ("bpf, libbpf: fix version info and add it to shared
> > object")
> > 
> > from the net tree and commit:
> > 
> >   60e4786e229d ("tools/bpf: generate pkg-config file for libbpf")
> > 
> > from the bpf-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.
> 
> argh. that's a heavy conflict.
> Since that patch was at the top of the bpf-next I removed it for now
> and will re-apply when bpf-next gets merged cleanly into net-next and
> we bring back net changes into bpf-next. Sorry Luca.

No worries - for the next time, should I have based the patch on net-
next rather than bpf-next?

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi