From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753020AbdDCNOX (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 3 Apr 2017 09:14:23 -0400
Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:59663 "EHLO
        www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752979AbdDCNOW (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 3 Apr 2017 09:14:22 -0400
Message-ID: <58E24AA4.9080204@iogearbox.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 15:14:12 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
CC: Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree
References: <20170403120748.2d11f2b0@canb.auug.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <20170403120748.2d11f2b0@canb.auug.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Authenticated-Sender: daniel@iogearbox.net
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 04/03/2017 04:07 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got conflicts in:
>
>    tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>    tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
>
> between commit:
>
>    02ea80b1850e ("bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests")
>
> from the net tree and commits:
>
>    6882804c916b ("selftests/bpf: add a test for overlapping packet range checks")
>    fb30d4b71214 ("bpf: Add tests for map-in-map")
>
> from the net-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below - though there are probably more fixups needed)
> 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 fine, thanks Stephen!