Linux-Next Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
@ 2020-05-19  3:27 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2020-05-19  3:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert, David Miller, Networking
  Cc: Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Christoph Hellwig, Sabrina Dubroca


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1112 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in:

  net/ipv6/af_inet6.c

between commit:

  3986912f6a9a ("ipv6: move SIOCADDRT and SIOCDELRT handling into ->compat_ioctl")

from the net-next tree and commit:

  0146dca70b87 ("xfrm: add support for UDPv6 encapsulation of ESP")

from the ipsec-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 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c
index b69496eaf922,aa4882929fd0..000000000000
--- a/net/ipv6/af_inet6.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/af_inet6.c
@@@ -60,7 -60,7 +60,8 @@@
  #include <net/calipso.h>
  #include <net/seg6.h>
  #include <net/rpl.h>
 +#include <net/compat.h>
+ #include <net/xfrm.h>
  
  #include <linux/uaccess.h>
  #include <linux/mroute6.h>

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
@ 2019-12-15 23:38 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2019-12-15 23:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert, David Miller, Networking
  Cc: Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Kirill Tkhai,
	Sabrina Dubroca


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1357 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in:

  net/unix/af_unix.c

between commit:

  3c32da19a858 ("unix: Show number of pending scm files of receive queue in fdinfo")

from the net-next tree and commit:

  b50b0580d27b ("net: add queue argument to __skb_wait_for_more_packets and __skb_{,try_}recv_datagram")

from the ipsec-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 net/unix/af_unix.c
index 6756a3ccc392,a7f707fc4cac..000000000000
--- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
+++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
@@@ -2100,8 -2058,8 +2100,8 @@@ static int unix_dgram_recvmsg(struct so
  		mutex_lock(&u->iolock);
  
  		skip = sk_peek_offset(sk, flags);
- 		skb = __skb_try_recv_datagram(sk, flags, scm_stat_del,
- 					      &skip, &err, &last);
+ 		skb = __skb_try_recv_datagram(sk, &sk->sk_receive_queue, flags,
 -					      NULL, &skip, &err, &last);
++					      scm_stat_del, &skip, &err, &last);
  		if (skb)
  			break;
  

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
@ 2018-04-30  0:35 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2018-04-30  0:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert, David Miller, Networking
  Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Jacek Kalwas,
	Willem de Bruijn


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1305 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in:

  net/ipv4/ip_output.c

between commit:

  bec1f6f69736 ("udp: generate gso with UDP_SEGMENT")

from the net-next tree and commit:

  cd027a5433d6 ("udp: enable UDP checksum offload for ESP")

from the ipsec-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 net/ipv4/ip_output.c
index f2338e40c37d,a2dfb5a9ba76..000000000000
--- a/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
@@@ -909,8 -906,8 +909,8 @@@ static int __ip_append_data(struct soc
  	if (transhdrlen &&
  	    length + fragheaderlen <= mtu &&
  	    rt->dst.dev->features & (NETIF_F_HW_CSUM | NETIF_F_IP_CSUM) &&
 -	    !(flags & MSG_MORE) &&
 +	    (!(flags & MSG_MORE) || cork->gso_size) &&
- 	    !exthdrlen)
+ 	    (!exthdrlen || (rt->dst.dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_ESP_TX_CSUM)))
  		csummode = CHECKSUM_PARTIAL;
  
  	cork->length += length;

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
@ 2017-02-12 23:25 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-02-12 23:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert, David Miller, Networking
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Julian Anastasov, Florian Westphal

Hi Steffen,

Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in:

  net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c

between commit:

  63fca65d0863 ("net: add confirm_neigh method to dst_ops")

from the net-next tree and commits:

  3d7d25a68ea5 ("xfrm: policy: remove garbage_collect callback")
  a2817d8b279b ("xfrm: policy: remove family field")

from the ipsec-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 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
index f68d75766d51,04ed1a1ae019..000000000000
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
@@@ -2856,32 -2843,15 +2843,32 @@@ static struct neighbour *xfrm_neigh_loo
  	return dst->path->ops->neigh_lookup(dst, skb, daddr);
  }
  
 +static void xfrm_confirm_neigh(const struct dst_entry *dst, const void *daddr)
 +{
 +	const struct dst_entry *path = dst->path;
 +
 +	for (; dst != path; dst = dst->child) {
 +		const struct xfrm_state *xfrm = dst->xfrm;
 +
 +		if (xfrm->props.mode == XFRM_MODE_TRANSPORT)
 +			continue;
 +		if (xfrm->type->flags & XFRM_TYPE_REMOTE_COADDR)
 +			daddr = xfrm->coaddr;
 +		else if (!(xfrm->type->flags & XFRM_TYPE_LOCAL_COADDR))
 +			daddr = &xfrm->id.daddr;
 +	}
 +	path->ops->confirm_neigh(path, daddr);
 +}
 +
- int xfrm_policy_register_afinfo(struct xfrm_policy_afinfo *afinfo)
+ int xfrm_policy_register_afinfo(const struct xfrm_policy_afinfo *afinfo, int family)
  {
  	int err = 0;
- 	if (unlikely(afinfo == NULL))
- 		return -EINVAL;
- 	if (unlikely(afinfo->family >= NPROTO))
+ 
+ 	if (WARN_ON(family >= ARRAY_SIZE(xfrm_policy_afinfo)))
  		return -EAFNOSUPPORT;
+ 
  	spin_lock(&xfrm_policy_afinfo_lock);
- 	if (unlikely(xfrm_policy_afinfo[afinfo->family] != NULL))
+ 	if (unlikely(xfrm_policy_afinfo[family] != NULL))
  		err = -EEXIST;
  	else {
  		struct dst_ops *dst_ops = afinfo->dst_ops;
@@@ -2899,11 -2869,7 +2886,9 @@@
  			dst_ops->link_failure = xfrm_link_failure;
  		if (likely(dst_ops->neigh_lookup == NULL))
  			dst_ops->neigh_lookup = xfrm_neigh_lookup;
 +		if (likely(!dst_ops->confirm_neigh))
 +			dst_ops->confirm_neigh = xfrm_confirm_neigh;
- 		if (likely(afinfo->garbage_collect == NULL))
- 			afinfo->garbage_collect = xfrm_garbage_collect_deferred;
- 		rcu_assign_pointer(xfrm_policy_afinfo[afinfo->family], afinfo);
+ 		rcu_assign_pointer(xfrm_policy_afinfo[family], afinfo);
  	}
  	spin_unlock(&xfrm_policy_afinfo_lock);
  

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
@ 2014-01-09  2:41 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2014-01-09  2:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert, David Miller, netdev
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Daniel Borkmann, Weilong Chen


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 605 bytes --]

Hi Steffen,

Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in
net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c between commits be7928d20bab ("net: xfrm:
xfrm_policy: fix inline not at beginning of declaration") and
da7c224b1baa ("net: xfrm: xfrm_policy: silence compiler warning") from
the net-next tree and commit 2f3ea9a95c58 ("xfrm: checkpatch erros with
inline keyword position") from the ipsec-next tree.

I fixed it up (I used the version from the net-next tree) and can carry
the fix as necessary (no action is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
  2013-09-25  5:29     ` Steffen Klassert
@ 2013-09-27  2:01       ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-09-27  2:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Fan Du, Joe Perches, David Miller, netdev


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1548 bytes --]

Hi Steffen,

On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 07:29:23 +0200 Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 09:59:19AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:25:05 +0200 Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:16:29PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in
> > > > include/net/xfrm.h between commit d511337a1eda ("xfrm.h: Remove extern
> > > > from function prototypes") from the net-next tree and commit aba826958830
> > > > ("{ipv4,xfrm}: Introduce xfrm_tunnel_notifier for xfrm tunnel mode
> > > > callback") from the ipsec-next tree.
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the information, I'll do a rebase of the ipsec-next
> > > tree tomorrow.
> > 
> > Did you miss the end of the next paragraph:  "no action is required"?
> > Dave can fix this up (like I did) when he merges your tree into his.
> 
> I applied this patch shortly before the merge window opened, it is a left
> over from the last develpoment cycle. I already rebased my tree onto
> net-next in the past if that happened, even if there were no merge
> conflicts. I did that just to see if everything still works. But I
> could also do a test merge to see if everything still works and ask
> to pull without a rebase then if this is the prefered way. Would make
> my life easier :)

That would be up to Dave ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
  2013-09-24 23:59   ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-09-25  5:29     ` Steffen Klassert
  2013-09-27  2:01       ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Steffen Klassert @ 2013-09-25  5:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen Rothwell
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Fan Du, Joe Perches, David Miller, netdev

On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 09:59:19AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Steffen,
> 
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:25:05 +0200 Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:16:29PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in
> > > include/net/xfrm.h between commit d511337a1eda ("xfrm.h: Remove extern
> > > from function prototypes") from the net-next tree and commit aba826958830
> > > ("{ipv4,xfrm}: Introduce xfrm_tunnel_notifier for xfrm tunnel mode
> > > callback") from the ipsec-next tree.
> > 
> > Thanks for the information, I'll do a rebase of the ipsec-next
> > tree tomorrow.
> 
> Did you miss the end of the next paragraph:  "no action is required"?
> Dave can fix this up (like I did) when he merges your tree into his.
> 

I applied this patch shortly before the merge window opened, it is a left
over from the last develpoment cycle. I already rebased my tree onto
net-next in the past if that happened, even if there were no merge
conflicts. I did that just to see if everything still works. But I
could also do a test merge to see if everything still works and ask
to pull without a rebase then if this is the prefered way. Would make
my life easier :)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
  2013-09-24 10:25 ` Steffen Klassert
@ 2013-09-24 23:59   ` Stephen Rothwell
  2013-09-25  5:29     ` Steffen Klassert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-09-24 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Fan Du, Joe Perches, David Miller, netdev


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 829 bytes --]

Hi Steffen,

On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:25:05 +0200 Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:16:29PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in
> > include/net/xfrm.h between commit d511337a1eda ("xfrm.h: Remove extern
> > from function prototypes") from the net-next tree and commit aba826958830
> > ("{ipv4,xfrm}: Introduce xfrm_tunnel_notifier for xfrm tunnel mode
> > callback") from the ipsec-next tree.
> 
> Thanks for the information, I'll do a rebase of the ipsec-next
> tree tomorrow.

Did you miss the end of the next paragraph:  "no action is required"?
Dave can fix this up (like I did) when he merges your tree into his.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
  2013-09-24  2:16 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-09-24 10:25 ` Steffen Klassert
  2013-09-24 23:59   ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Steffen Klassert @ 2013-09-24 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen Rothwell
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Fan Du, Joe Perches, David Miller, netdev

Hi Stephen.

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:16:29PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Steffen,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in
> include/net/xfrm.h between commit d511337a1eda ("xfrm.h: Remove extern
> from function prototypes") from the net-next tree and commit aba826958830
> ("{ipv4,xfrm}: Introduce xfrm_tunnel_notifier for xfrm tunnel mode
> callback") from the ipsec-next tree.
> 

Thanks for the information, I'll do a rebase of the ipsec-next
tree tomorrow.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree
@ 2013-09-24  2:16 Stephen Rothwell
  2013-09-24 10:25 ` Steffen Klassert
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-09-24  2:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steffen Klassert
  Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Fan Du, Joe Perches, David Miller, netdev


[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4878 bytes --]

Hi Steffen,

Today's linux-next merge of the ipsec-next tree got a conflict in
include/net/xfrm.h between commit d511337a1eda ("xfrm.h: Remove extern
from function prototypes") from the net-next tree and commit aba826958830
("{ipv4,xfrm}: Introduce xfrm_tunnel_notifier for xfrm tunnel mode
callback") from the ipsec-next tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc include/net/xfrm.h
index 7657461,c7afa6e..0000000
--- a/include/net/xfrm.h
+++ b/include/net/xfrm.h
@@@ -1493,39 -1495,35 +1499,39 @@@ static inline int xfrm4_rcv_spi(struct 
  	return xfrm4_rcv_encap(skb, nexthdr, spi, 0);
  }
  
 -extern int xfrm4_extract_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm4_prepare_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm4_output(struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm4_output_finish(struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm4_tunnel_register(struct xfrm_tunnel *handler, unsigned short family);
 -extern int xfrm4_tunnel_deregister(struct xfrm_tunnel *handler, unsigned short family);
 -extern int xfrm4_mode_tunnel_input_register(struct xfrm_tunnel_notifier *handler);
 -extern int xfrm4_mode_tunnel_input_deregister(struct xfrm_tunnel_notifier *handler);
 -extern int xfrm6_extract_header(struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm6_extract_input(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm6_rcv_spi(struct sk_buff *skb, int nexthdr, __be32 spi);
 -extern int xfrm6_transport_finish(struct sk_buff *skb, int async);
 -extern int xfrm6_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm6_input_addr(struct sk_buff *skb, xfrm_address_t *daddr,
 -			    xfrm_address_t *saddr, u8 proto);
 -extern int xfrm6_tunnel_register(struct xfrm6_tunnel *handler, unsigned short family);
 -extern int xfrm6_tunnel_deregister(struct xfrm6_tunnel *handler, unsigned short family);
 -extern __be32 xfrm6_tunnel_alloc_spi(struct net *net, xfrm_address_t *saddr);
 -extern __be32 xfrm6_tunnel_spi_lookup(struct net *net, const xfrm_address_t *saddr);
 -extern int xfrm6_extract_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm6_prepare_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm6_output(struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm6_output_finish(struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm6_find_1stfragopt(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb,
 -				 u8 **prevhdr);
 +int xfrm4_extract_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm4_prepare_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm4_output(struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm4_output_finish(struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm4_tunnel_register(struct xfrm_tunnel *handler, unsigned short family);
 +int xfrm4_tunnel_deregister(struct xfrm_tunnel *handler, unsigned short family);
- int xfrm4_mode_tunnel_input_register(struct xfrm_tunnel *handler);
- int xfrm4_mode_tunnel_input_deregister(struct xfrm_tunnel *handler);
++int xfrm4_mode_tunnel_input_register(struct xfrm_tunnel_notifier *handler);
++int xfrm4_mode_tunnel_input_deregister(struct xfrm_tunnel_notifier *handler);
 +void xfrm4_local_error(struct sk_buff *skb, u32 mtu);
 +int xfrm6_extract_header(struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm6_extract_input(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm6_rcv_spi(struct sk_buff *skb, int nexthdr, __be32 spi);
 +int xfrm6_transport_finish(struct sk_buff *skb, int async);
 +int xfrm6_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm6_input_addr(struct sk_buff *skb, xfrm_address_t *daddr,
 +		     xfrm_address_t *saddr, u8 proto);
 +int xfrm6_tunnel_register(struct xfrm6_tunnel *handler, unsigned short family);
 +int xfrm6_tunnel_deregister(struct xfrm6_tunnel *handler,
 +			    unsigned short family);
 +__be32 xfrm6_tunnel_alloc_spi(struct net *net, xfrm_address_t *saddr);
 +__be32 xfrm6_tunnel_spi_lookup(struct net *net, const xfrm_address_t *saddr);
 +int xfrm6_extract_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm6_prepare_output(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm6_output(struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm6_output_finish(struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm6_find_1stfragopt(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb,
 +			  u8 **prevhdr);
 +void xfrm6_local_error(struct sk_buff *skb, u32 mtu);
  
  #ifdef CONFIG_XFRM
 -extern int xfrm4_udp_encap_rcv(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb);
 -extern int xfrm_user_policy(struct sock *sk, int optname, u8 __user *optval, int optlen);
 +int xfrm4_udp_encap_rcv(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb);
 +int xfrm_user_policy(struct sock *sk, int optname,
 +		     u8 __user *optval, int optlen);
  #else
  static inline int xfrm_user_policy(struct sock *sk, int optname, u8 __user *optval, int optlen)
  {

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-05-19  3:27 linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with the net-next tree Stephen Rothwell
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-12-15 23:38 Stephen Rothwell
2018-04-30  0:35 Stephen Rothwell
2017-02-12 23:25 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-09  2:41 Stephen Rothwell
2013-09-24  2:16 Stephen Rothwell
2013-09-24 10:25 ` Steffen Klassert
2013-09-24 23:59   ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-09-25  5:29     ` Steffen Klassert
2013-09-27  2:01       ` Stephen Rothwell

Linux-Next Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/0 linux-next/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-next linux-next/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next \
		linux-next@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-next

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-next


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git