netdev - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-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: <CAADnVQKOURuBdcYgCUDW5=WZsNHBzt4w=s3JCP=4ax1U_AWwFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 10:50:48 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, 
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, 
	Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree

On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 1:12 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 09:33:11PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 9:07 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > >   kernel/bpf/btf.c
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > >   5da7e15fb5a1 ("net: Add rx_skb of kfree_skb to raw_tp_null_args[].")
> > >
> > > from the bpf tree and commit:
> > >
> > >   c83e2d970bae ("bpf: Add tracepoints with null-able arguments")
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > Thanks for headsup.
> >
> > Jiri,
> > what should we do ?
> > I feel that moving c83e2d970bae into bpf tree would be the best ?
>
> right, bpf tree would have been better fit for that.. should I resend that for bpf tree?

After sleeping on it I guess it's fine as-is.
When bpf tree gets pulled we will merge Linus's tree and resolve that
conflict way before the merge window.