From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754602AbcFHBRK (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2016 21:17:10 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:36457 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754524AbcFHBRI (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2016 21:17:08 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 11:17:05 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: David Miller , Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, WANG Cong , Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree Message-ID: <20160608111705.2f196767@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: net/sched/act_police.c between commit: 53eb440f4ada ("net sched actions: introduce timestamp for firsttime use") from the net tree and commit: a03e6fe56971 ("act_police: fix a crash during removal") from the net-next tree. I fixed it up (I think that the firstuse zero initialisation has become redundant, so I just removed it) 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