From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexei Starovoitov Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the bpf tree Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 16:29:16 -0800 Message-ID: <20180109002914.447kcn4xqrkdtqql@ast-mbp> References: <20180109112125.78277253@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f170.google.com ([209.85.192.170]:37757 "EHLO mail-pf0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754002AbeAIA3T (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 19:29:19 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180109112125.78277253@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: David Miller , Networking , Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:21:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c > > between commit: > > 2b36047e7889 ("selftests/bpf: fix test_align") > > from the bpf tree and commit: > > 6a28b446b7d2 ("selftests/bpf: adjust test_align expected output") > > 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 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c > index 471bbbdb94db,fe916d29e166..000000000000 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c > @@@ -473,8 -473,28 +473,8 @@@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = > .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS, > .result = REJECT, > .matches = { > - {4, "R5=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0,imm=0)"}, > + {4, "R5_w=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0,imm=0)"}, thanks. That's correct resolution.