From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754739AbdCXAKj (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:10:39 -0400
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:59902 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751406AbdCXAKh (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:10:37 -0400
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20170323.171035.27948034948873194.davem@davemloft.net>
To: sfr@canb.auug.org.au
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ast@fb.com, kafai@fb.com
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with Linus' tree
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20170324110514.0376c46f@canb.auug.org.au>
References: <20170324110514.0376c46f@canb.auug.org.au>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.12 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:14 +1100

> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   8c290e60fa2a ("bpf: fix hashmap extra_elems logic")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   bcc6b1b7ebf8 ("bpf: Add hash of maps support")
> 
> 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.

I did the same resolution just an hour ago when merging net into
net-next.

Thanks!