[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DBBP189MB14335036A7D41945AEF5043B95CE9@DBBP189MB1433.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 19:03:14 +0000
From: Sriram Yagnaraman <sriram.yagnaraman@....tech>
To: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net 0/4] Netfilter fixes for net: manual merge
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 January 2023 10:14
> To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>; netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org;
> Sriram Yagnaraman <sriram.yagnaraman@....tech>; Florian Westphal
> <fw@...len.de>
> Cc: davem@...emloft.net; netdev@...r.kernel.org; kuba@...nel.org;
> pabeni@...hat.com; edumazet@...gle.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/4] Netfilter fixes for net: manual merge
>
> Hello,
>
> On 24/01/2023 19:39, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The following patchset contains Netfilter fixes for net:
>
> (...)
>
> > Sriram Yagnaraman (4):
> > netfilter: conntrack: fix vtag checks for ABORT/SHUTDOWN_COMPLETE
> > netfilter: conntrack: fix bug in for_each_sctp_chunk
> > Revert "netfilter: conntrack: add sctp DATA_SENT state"
> > netfilter: conntrack: unify established states for SCTP paths
>
> FYI, we got a small conflict when merging -net in net-next in the MPTCP tree
> due to the last two patches applied in -net:
>
> 13bd9b31a969 ("Revert "netfilter: conntrack: add sctp DATA_SENT state"")
> a44b7651489f ("netfilter: conntrack: unify established states for SCTP
> paths")
>
> and this one from net-next:
>
> f71cb8f45d09 ("netfilter: conntrack: sctp: use nf log infrastructure for invalid
> packets")
Ah, that's my bad. I should have pushed to nf-next/net-next instead.
Maintainers: I am not fully aware of what needs to be done in this case, please advise.
>
> The conflict has been resolved on our side[1] and the resolution we suggest is
> attached to this email.
The attached patch looks fine to me.
>
> Cheers,
> Matt
>
> [1] https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/commit/4e2bc066dae4
> --
> Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions www.tessares.net
Powered by blists - more mailing lists