Hi all,

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 11:08:56 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   tools/bpf/bpftool/map.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   e0665239e07f ("bpftool: Fix errno variable usage")
> 
> from the bpf tree and commit:
> 
>   0478c3bf8124 ("bpftool: Use print_entry_error() in case of ENOENT when dumping")
> 
> from the bpf-next tree.
> 
> diff --cc tools/bpf/bpftool/map.c
> index 1744bf61a0b8,44b192e87708..000000000000
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/map.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/map.c
> @@@ -722,11 -715,16 +715,16 @@@ static int dump_map_elem(int fd, void *
>   		jsonw_string_field(json_wtr, "error", strerror(lookup_errno));
>   		jsonw_end_object(json_wtr);
>   	} else {
> + 		const char *msg = NULL;
> + 
>  -		if (errno == ENOENT)
>  +		if (lookup_errno == ENOENT)
> - 			print_entry_plain(map_info, key, NULL);
> - 		else
> - 			print_entry_error(map_info, key,
> - 					  strerror(lookup_errno));
> + 			msg = "<no entry>";
> + 		else if (lookup_errno == ENOSPC &&
> + 			 map_info->type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_REUSEPORT_SOCKARRAY)
> + 			msg = "<cannot read>";
> + 
> + 		print_entry_error(map_info, key,
> + 				  msg ? : strerror(lookup_errno));
>   	}
>   
>   	return 0;

This is now a conflict between the net-next and bpf trees.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell