[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201002135956.2941cf47@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 13:59:56 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
Tony Ambardar <tony.ambardar@...il.com>,
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 bpf tree
Hi all,
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 14:07:15 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> tools/lib/bpf/btf.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 1245008122d7 ("libbpf: Fix native endian assumption when parsing BTF")
>
> from the bpf tree and commit:
>
> 3289959b97ca ("libbpf: Support BTF loading and raw data output in both endianness")
>
> from the bpf-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I used the latter version) 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.
This is now a conflict between the net-next and net trees.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists