From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937085AbcKPXtA (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:49:00 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:37627 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753994AbcKPXs4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:48:56 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:48:53 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: David Miller , Networking Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josef Bacik , Thomas Graf Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree Message-ID: <20161117104853.7c0a316d@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: include/linux/bpf_verifier.h between commit: f23cc643f9ba ("bpf: fix range arithmetic for bpf map access") from the net tree and commit: 57a09bf0a416 ("bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers") from the net-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 include/linux/bpf_verifier.h index 6aaf425cebc3,ac5b393ee6b2..000000000000 --- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h +++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h @@@ -22,8 -22,8 +22,9 @@@ struct bpf_reg_state * Used to determine if any memory access using this register will * result in a bad access. */ - u64 min_value, max_value; + s64 min_value; + u64 max_value; + u32 id; union { /* valid when type == CONST_IMM | PTR_TO_STACK | UNKNOWN_VALUE */ s64 imm;