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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS 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 B96E1C433E1 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 01:43:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B0F82070C for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 01:43:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b="Rzpt9LG7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728672AbgGFBn2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jul 2020 21:43:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51114 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728430AbgGFBnZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jul 2020 21:43:25 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEB7FC061794; Sun, 5 Jul 2020 18:43:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4B0SyH0ln5z9sDX; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 11:43:18 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=201702; t=1593999800; bh=1G1w5foTPLzMSqkizEB3dQQHU9BJDlBNIyWwFvDqBAI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Rzpt9LG7+GqSloMm8kCKK+WEro1KxFTa4K848rXPwc+NR6l0vC2E+xv5nmTErtOf3 jCH/UEqf5SsgmbczNWS34KWzyCGqJIAlqae4MUb68fHBbZwm4edHRUe0SIb3piVUBz Wyk3AaTWP7eoO1Fm0vuZQP9wpEnDUDD78bbHYRGSWkmhiNm433p7bylRX5U/4mWaTE IVkBTejGm52v7VvYDlQwexAatfZPy/Pnszz8kIBsq1y0bwuxh3AqmSRJGdxDWuYzvt GgDG6s3hFkRV/iurCq7H3WTy04JlYxr10OgvB1Ayq+hvF8TxxW2oXEhV8j2sUn2Mvw wBbGayX+G+RZA== Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 11:43:16 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Networking , David Miller Cc: Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Yonghong Song , Andrii Nakryiko Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree Message-ID: <20200706114316.400be49e@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20200626100527.4dad8695@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20200626100527.4dad8695@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/23I18qynHUoHQ.hO=eYNg5E"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --Sig_/23I18qynHUoHQ.hO=eYNg5E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:05:27 +1000 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in: >=20 > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c >=20 > between commits: >=20 > 9c82a63cf370 ("libbpf: Fix CO-RE relocs against .text section") > 647b502e3d54 ("selftests/bpf: Refactor some net macros to bpf_tracing_n= et.h") >=20 > from the bpf tree and commit: >=20 > 84544f5637ff ("selftests/bpf: Move newer bpf_iter_* type redefining to = a new header file") >=20 > from the bpf-next tree. >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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 @@@ > =20 > char _license[] SEC("license") =3D "GPL"; > =20 > - #define sk_rmem_alloc sk_backlog.rmem_alloc > - #define sk_refcnt __sk_common.skc_refcnt > -=20 > - struct bpf_iter_meta { > - struct seq_file *seq; > - __u64 session_id; > - __u64 seq_num; > - } __attribute__((preserve_access_index)); > -=20 > - struct bpf_iter__netlink { > - struct bpf_iter_meta *meta; > - struct netlink_sock *sk; > - } __attribute__((preserve_access_index)); > -=20 > -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. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/23I18qynHUoHQ.hO=eYNg5E Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAl8CgbQACgkQAVBC80lX 0GwXaAf/WSMHGgauwreog5bZWHBRaI8CKhxEYFjH80ugpyBm2n9o168kfOIjw3u/ JNFCWFAaSl3eM1ry6r9bl8PShzyHMdEpuYXr1DUTn+6UQvuYXD7JpLR8NAm8Snha ik2AOAkPWe4soJ9XbuooNuLDEeozXLgNsIkgBO+1/lHHu5EgGskoPexGaMvLyAlu YDsIQ9iv8kcjXXxJiA+wXy4XhTbL3Yl/IYXiWenvWy3lkIDc+7VDV248o5V4vXKb sWSQzxz2EDEEq6cdgqHcnQ0HUAk4f4j8u0ppnZ11kjH1UE1qAE4+6MDhOWF+Qi9o ht9wzCNyje1AVKE46szGqt6t1A8RSQ== =JZE7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/23I18qynHUoHQ.hO=eYNg5E--