From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77DB1C4321A for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 23:00:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D0AB208E3 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 23:00:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dev-mellanox-co-il.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@dev-mellanox-co-il.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="cywHBuyG" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726586AbfF0XAD (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 19:00:03 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f48.google.com ([209.85.167.48]:41707 "EHLO mail-lf1-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726545AbfF0XAD (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jun 2019 19:00:03 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f48.google.com with SMTP id 136so2665521lfa.8 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:00:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dev-mellanox-co-il.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hlkWLIAXD/X1/Rol3Kp/jDc7fHX/O8gfTPi+EszwxMk=; b=cywHBuyGo6Bo8Pe0YgCNqDTgGJXYeW2qfryVIdoqHLuFB6yVVqj4P4FcYcesoQD+m5 TH+oD3vLkdsTZjS7ipHAHxbrFPfsWa/I0k3IFc0KXP9sFx57JS1JKyJZOhCjqg5cfHiB Q+KdkYr3u9lzZAKNwJ6Yx/l3qrJiwLxSJZJ13O61YI+bR/IzNi1EO1hJd8FI2St30Gju 84q4N6104fdJmZ0apSLhS7IkHbW3xo3/iZdts4nWc6wgla3KR7MQBxoDL6I4DP67jooz pzsfcKWnggz7Gx/7O1BGpZPyThLAoMi+Exa2uxy0zBpn18UwNlFwKEQ8PW/AODf4F122 af5w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hlkWLIAXD/X1/Rol3Kp/jDc7fHX/O8gfTPi+EszwxMk=; b=GIM/NDt8n8vLIdbaok7Fi3WwIz0gh/N/xzpOO1plmVsfqdtAQWL0kMFW18N8IIeswL NFQRES1mrEEfRSBCuyth5B6+c1Yb9YyjU9VQufKGLrT/iI8mnEkbT3E3z0QaZmMHDW9t V4ZOf5wnDE9BcBk55cVN75kM61S+KkCAN5qoe63J7Wd8/YONBtU6tl7vjHpEqFTrwWNh liD4GlEuzTggpv/E4cD9flRrOO9wmTFqsfviGB834oxpBsPByx8UMgU+AoN4kbUATsSB K/cNV78Lrb6vchgd5gzsDpTr8r4w4g3on5u9YjRGX0c82dlytyJ36/aZB81qMFsFTc1g UVig== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVe9rKKdSY3AuVuLgsYjrKjICf0Hu1fjryKub0tA6q/izxucxuW lxtTJpnHmUvEp261jCScMGUbxCJkWgG07mClX1RXSg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwDjhyAm/JnXPDZNdNiwHLoYgZLNOeH0iN1jwqCMcd99dUJxH9I59IhGTbrF+XNbuezHXXX+OBkXWphnKAhluQ= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:518d:: with SMTP id u13mr3366240lfi.40.1561676401476; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:00:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190627140929.74ae7da6@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20190627140929.74ae7da6@canb.auug.org.au> From: Saeed Mahameed Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:59:50 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the net-next tree To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Leon Romanovsky , David Miller , Networking , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Yevgeny Kliteynik , Saeed Mahameed , Eli Britstein , Jianbo Liu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 9:09 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eswitch_offloads.c > > between commits: > > 955858009708 ("net/mlx5e: Fix number of vports for ingress ACL configuration") > d4a18e16c570 ("net/mlx5e: Enable setting multiple match criteria for flow group") > > from the net-next tree and commits: > > 7445cfb1169c ("net/mlx5: E-Switch, Tag packet with vport number in VF vports and uplink ingress ACLs") > c01cfd0f1115 ("net/mlx5: E-Switch, Add match on vport metadata for rule in fast path") > > from the mlx5-next tree. > > I fixed it up (I basically used the latter versions) 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. > Thanks Stephen, this will be handled in my next pull request to net-next. > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell