Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:57:23 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180515075723.658e19fd@canb.auug.org.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180514134140.0c468174@cakuba>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 958 bytes --]

Hi Jakub,

On Mon, 14 May 2018 13:41:40 -0700 Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 May 2018 11:57:00 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > diff --cc tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > index 8da4eeb101a6,df54c4c9e48a..000000000000
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > @@@ -2163,9 -2193,12 +2193,12 @@@ int bpf_prog_load_xattr(const struct bp
> >   
> >   	if (!attr)
> >   		return -EINVAL;
> > + 	if (!attr->file)
> > + 		return -EINVAL;
> >   
> > - 	obj = bpf_object__open(attr->file);
> > + 	obj = __bpf_object__open(attr->file, NULL, 0,
> > + 				 bpf_prog_type__needs_kver(attr->prog_type));
> >  -	if (IS_ERR(obj))
> >  +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(obj))
> >   		return -ENOENT;  
> 
> This is okay, thanks.  The OR_NULL is unnecessary just using the
> bpf-next code is a better merge IMO.

Thanks, I have updated my merge resolution from today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

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