From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 11:05:06 +0100 Message-ID: <20130202100506.GB1864@minipsycho.orion> References: <20130202142253.e31167bf695f000c0c78f4cc@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130202142253.e31167bf695f000c0c78f4cc@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner , =?utf-8?B?IllPU0hJRlVKSSBIaWRlYWtpIC8g5ZCJ6Jek6Iux5piOIg==?= List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org Sat, Feb 02, 2013 at 04:22:53AM CET, sfr@canb.auug.org.au wrote: >Hi all, > >Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in >net/ipv6/route.c between commit bd30e947207e ("ipv6: do not create >neighbor entries for local delivery") from the net tree and commit >c440f1609b65 ("ipv6: Do not depend on rt->n in ip6_pol_route()") from the >net-next tree. > >I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary >(no action is required). > >-- >Cheers, >Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au > >diff --cc net/ipv6/route.c >index 363d8b7,f3328bc..0000000 >--- a/net/ipv6/route.c >+++ b/net/ipv6/route.c >@@@ -928,7 -884,7 +884,7 @@@ restart > dst_hold(&rt->dst); > read_unlock_bh(&table->tb6_lock); > >- if (!rt->n && !(rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_NONEXTHOP | RTF_LOCAL))) > - if (!(rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_NONEXTHOP | RTF_GATEWAY))) >++ if (!(rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_NONEXTHOP | RTF_LOCAL | RTF_GATEWAY))) I believe that no change here is correct to do. RTF_LOCAL here is needed only before Yoshifuji's "IPv6 rt->n removal" > nrt = rt6_alloc_cow(rt, &fl6->daddr, &fl6->saddr); > else if (!(rt->dst.flags & DST_HOST)) > nrt = rt6_alloc_clone(rt, &fl6->daddr);