From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the bpf tree Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 12:03:05 +1100 Message-ID: <20190220120305.3c22596e@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20190220113729.49f28f73@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/RTVdESC3lpdA4KPdqx2fHd9"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stanislav Fomichev Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , David Miller , Networking , Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org --Sig_/RTVdESC3lpdA4KPdqx2fHd9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Stanislav, On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 16:45:46 -0800 Stanislav Fomichev wrot= e: > > OTOH, I don't understand why is there a conflict? bpf and bpf-next > adding tests in the same place/file? Those can be trivially resolved > when bpf and bpf-next are merged in the next window. Yes, and yes :-) --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/RTVdESC3lpdA4KPdqx2fHd9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAlxsp0kACgkQAVBC80lX 0Gz2rAf6Av4sWZUHyBHAV1e84+jXQzEnf5E0p2RShtk2H6Rj03n3BbfULRDvHi0H vSuRh4rvkruNLBKSMcJZrL49MhqgXFUJLziuwag5NL77pnlDky7oMe6UYU/Os41l Y7jpK4KfHNhGQxgKZL4La1FdEmbWcCw6EfB8RnHXggGaXuqKlJDhxbECd6x4pUgT hkrUE5SNOihrVFPbw4a+V8iX1EqXVpLrX7nLfiYsMH7IaJKYxgVzgp2/qnTKXs9M MEVliOho+9Ejy+WiTTbdYDPLVSZg8V/CKRzcpD4aec3PSy9oXryCUAwI/BVT0kUv VB8mGov04T3qkoSzFcP0B0ZBIjrgLw== =23Cb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/RTVdESC3lpdA4KPdqx2fHd9--