netdev - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma 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]

Date:   Mon, 6 May 2019 07:13:12 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vu Pham <vuhuong@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Mark Bloch <markb@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the rdma tree

On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 02:01:47PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 13:58:46 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Leon,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   35b0aa67b298 ("RDMA/mlx5: Refactor netdev affinity code")
> >
> > from the rdma tree and commit:
> >
> >   c42260f19545 ("net/mlx5: Separate and generalize dma device from pci device")
> >
> > from the mlx5-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/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > index 6135a0b285de,fae6a6a1fbea..000000000000
> > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > @@@ -200,12 -172,18 +200,12 @@@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct not
> >
> >   	switch (event) {
> >   	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
> >  +		/* Should already be registered during the load */
> >  +		if (ibdev->is_rep)
> >  +			break;
> >   		write_lock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> > - 		if (ndev->dev.parent == &mdev->pdev->dev)
> >  -		if (ibdev->rep) {
> >  -			struct mlx5_eswitch *esw = ibdev->mdev->priv.eswitch;
> >  -			struct net_device *rep_ndev;
> >  -
> >  -			rep_ndev = mlx5_ib_get_rep_netdev(esw,
> >  -							  ibdev->rep->vport);
> >  -			if (rep_ndev == ndev)
> >  -				roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		} else if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device) {
> > ++		if (ndev->dev.parent == mdev->device)
> >   			roce->netdev = ndev;
> >  -		}
> >   		write_unlock(&roce->netdev_lock);
> >   		break;
> >
>
> This is now a conflict between the net-next tree and the rdma tree.

Thanks Stephen,
Looks good.

>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)