From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 11:43:16 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200706114316.400be49e@canb.auug.org.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200626100527.4dad8695@canb.auug.org.au>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2042 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:05:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c
>
> between commits:
>
> 9c82a63cf370 ("libbpf: Fix CO-RE relocs against .text section")
> 647b502e3d54 ("selftests/bpf: Refactor some net macros to bpf_tracing_net.h")
>
> from the bpf tree and commit:
>
> 84544f5637ff ("selftests/bpf: Move newer bpf_iter_* type redefining to a new header file")
>
> from the bpf-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.
>
> diff --cc tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c
> index 75ecf956a2df,cec82a419800..000000000000
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c
> @@@ -11,21 -7,7 +7,7 @@@
>
> char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
>
> - #define sk_rmem_alloc sk_backlog.rmem_alloc
> - #define sk_refcnt __sk_common.skc_refcnt
> -
> - struct bpf_iter_meta {
> - struct seq_file *seq;
> - __u64 session_id;
> - __u64 seq_num;
> - } __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> -
> - struct bpf_iter__netlink {
> - struct bpf_iter_meta *meta;
> - struct netlink_sock *sk;
> - } __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> -
> -static inline struct inode *SOCK_INODE(struct socket *socket)
> +static __attribute__((noinline)) struct inode *SOCK_INODE(struct socket *socket)
> {
> return &container_of(socket, struct socket_alloc, socket)->vfs_inode;
> }
This is now a conflict between net-next tree and the net tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-06 1:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-26 0:05 linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-06 1:43 ` Stephen Rothwell [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-03-07 1:40 Stephen Rothwell
2023-03-06 22:58 Stephen Rothwell
2023-03-10 0:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2023-03-10 3:18 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2022-11-21 1:27 Stephen Rothwell
2022-08-26 1:46 Stephen Rothwell
2022-08-25 0:50 Stephen Rothwell
2022-08-22 1:01 Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-05 23:39 Stephen Rothwell
2020-09-30 4:07 Stephen Rothwell
2020-10-02 3:59 ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-05-15 3:18 Stephen Rothwell
2019-10-08 22:47 Stephen Rothwell
2019-10-15 23:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-10-07 22:48 Stephen Rothwell
2019-10-15 23:27 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-04-17 1:08 Stephen Rothwell
2019-04-24 3:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-12-04 1:09 Stephen Rothwell
2018-12-04 1:05 Stephen Rothwell
2018-11-12 0:54 Stephen Rothwell
2018-05-14 1:57 Stephen Rothwell
2018-05-14 20:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2018-05-14 21:57 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-05-02 2:09 Stephen Rothwell
2018-05-02 4:40 ` Song Liu
2018-05-02 5:50 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-05-02 6:05 ` Song Liu
2018-04-26 0:53 Stephen Rothwell
2018-04-26 7:57 ` Daniel Borkmann
2018-02-26 0:41 Stephen Rothwell
2018-02-26 9:03 ` Daniel Borkmann
2018-02-26 23:28 ` Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200706114316.400be49e@canb.auug.org.au \
--to=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=andriin@fb.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).