Hi all,

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

  net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c

between commit:

  4e994776e7bd ("ip_tunnel: Do not use mark in skb by default")

from the net tree and commit:

  b0066da52ea5 ("ip_tunnel: Rename & publish init_tunnel_flow")

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 net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c
index 6d21068f9b55,b2117d89bc83..000000000000
--- a/net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c
@@@ -710,9 -694,16 +694,9 @@@ void ip_tunnel_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb
  		}
  	}
  
- 	init_tunnel_flow(&fl4, protocol, dst, tnl_params->saddr,
- 			 tunnel->parms.o_key, RT_TOS(tos), tunnel->parms.link,
- 			 tunnel->fwmark);
 -	if (tunnel->fwmark) {
 -		ip_tunnel_init_flow(&fl4, protocol, dst, tnl_params->saddr,
 -				    tunnel->parms.o_key, RT_TOS(tos),
 -				    tunnel->parms.link, tunnel->fwmark);
 -	}
 -	else {
 -		ip_tunnel_init_flow(&fl4, protocol, dst, tnl_params->saddr,
 -				    tunnel->parms.o_key, RT_TOS(tos),
 -				    tunnel->parms.link, skb->mark);
 -	}
++	ip_tunnel_init_flow(&fl4, protocol, dst, tnl_params->saddr,
++			    tunnel->parms.o_key, RT_TOS(tos),
++			    tunnel->parms.link, tunnel->fwmark);
  
  	if (ip_tunnel_encap(skb, tunnel, &protocol, &fl4) < 0)
  		goto tx_error;