All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the s390 tree
@ 2017-02-21 23:15 Stephen Rothwell
  2017-02-22  6:33 ` Daniel Borkmann
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-02-21 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Miller, Networking, Martin Schwidefsky, Heiko Carstens
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Daniel Borkmann

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:

  arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c

between commit:

  9437964885f8 ("s390/bpf: remove redundant check for non-null image")

from the s390 tree and commit:

  9d876e79df6a ("bpf: fix unlocking of jited image when module ronx not set")

from the net-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 arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index b3b0af86b84e,b49c52a02087..000000000000
--- a/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@@ -1331,11 -1323,14 +1323,11 @@@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(st
  	}
  	if (bpf_jit_enable > 1) {
  		bpf_jit_dump(fp->len, jit.size, pass, jit.prg_buf);
 -		if (jit.prg_buf)
 -			print_fn_code(jit.prg_buf, jit.size_prg);
 -	}
 -	if (jit.prg_buf) {
 -		bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro(header);
 -		fp->bpf_func = (void *) jit.prg_buf;
 -		fp->jited = 1;
 +		print_fn_code(jit.prg_buf, jit.size_prg);
  	}
- 	set_memory_ro((unsigned long)header, header->pages);
++	bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro(header);
 +	fp->bpf_func = (void *) jit.prg_buf;
 +	fp->jited = 1;
  free_addrs:
  	kfree(jit.addrs);
  out:

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the s390 tree
  2017-02-21 23:15 linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the s390 tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2017-02-22  6:33 ` Daniel Borkmann
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2017-02-22  6:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen Rothwell, David Miller, Networking, Martin Schwidefsky,
	Heiko Carstens
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel

On 02/22/2017 12:15 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>    arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
>
> between commit:
>
>    9437964885f8 ("s390/bpf: remove redundant check for non-null image")
>
> from the s390 tree and commit:
>
>    9d876e79df6a ("bpf: fix unlocking of jited image when module ronx not set")
>
> from the net-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.

Looks good, thanks!

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the s390 tree
@ 2018-05-29  3:00 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2018-05-29  3:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Miller, Networking, Martin Schwidefsky, Heiko Carstens
  Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Ursula Braun,
	Daniel Borkmann, Alexei Starovoitov

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1049 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:

  arch/s390/net/Makefile

between commit:

  866f4c8e0e26 ("s390/net: add pnetid support")

from the s390 tree and commit:

  e1cf4befa297 ("bpf, s390x: remove ld_abs/ld_ind")

from the net-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 arch/s390/net/Makefile
index e2b85ffdbb0c,d4663b4bf509..000000000000
--- a/arch/s390/net/Makefile
+++ b/arch/s390/net/Makefile
@@@ -2,5 -2,4 +2,5 @@@
  #
  # Arch-specific network modules
  #
- obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) += bpf_jit.o bpf_jit_comp.o
+ obj-$(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) += bpf_jit_comp.o
 +obj-$(CONFIG_HAVE_PNETID) += pnet.o

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2018-05-29  3:00 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-02-21 23:15 linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the s390 tree Stephen Rothwell
2017-02-22  6:33 ` Daniel Borkmann
2018-05-29  3:00 Stephen Rothwell

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.