netdev - Re: [External] linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the bpf 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAA68J_ZYfJdVQS4_sWB2RVowXO1UVPQVzoNmdFN4P96kKV3KEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Apr 2021 20:50:33 -0700
From:   "Cong Wang ." <cong.wang@...edance.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the
 bpf tree

On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 8:02 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>   include/linux/skmsg.h
>
> between commit:
>
>   1c84b33101c8 ("bpf, sockmap: Fix sk->prot unhash op reset")
>
> from the bpf tree and commit:
>
>   8a59f9d1e3d4 ("sock: Introduce sk->sk_prot->psock_update_sk_prot()")
>
> from the net-next tree.
>
> I didn't know how to fixed it up so I just used the latter version or
> today - a better solution would be appreciated. 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.

The right way to resolve this is to move the lines added in commit
1c84b33101c8 to the similar place in tcp_bpf_update_proto().

Thanks.