* linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
@ 2016-05-17 0:24 Stephen Rothwell
2016-05-17 6:05 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-05-17 7:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2016-05-17 0:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Miller, netdev, Catalin Marinas
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Daniel Borkmann, Yang Shi, Will Deacon
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
arch/arm64/Kconfig
between commit:
8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition")
from the arm64 tree and commit:
6077776b5908 ("bpf: split HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant")
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 arch/arm64/Kconfig
index 8845c0d100d7,e6761ea2feec..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
@@@ -59,9 -58,7 +59,9 @@@ config ARM6
select HAVE_ARCH_MMAP_RND_COMPAT_BITS if COMPAT
select HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER
select HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK
+ select HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
+ select HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
- select HAVE_BPF_JIT
+ select HAVE_EBPF_JIT
select HAVE_C_RECORDMCOUNT
select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR
select HAVE_CMPXCHG_DOUBLE
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
2016-05-17 0:24 linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2016-05-17 6:05 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-05-17 7:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2016-05-17 6:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, David Miller, netdev, Catalin Marinas
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yang Shi, Will Deacon
On 05/17/2016 02:24 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm64/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> 8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition")
>
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
>
> 6077776b5908 ("bpf: split HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant")
>
> 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.
Diff looks good, thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
2016-05-17 0:24 linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-05-17 6:05 ` Daniel Borkmann
@ 2016-05-17 7:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-05-17 7:12 ` Daniel Borkmann
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2016-05-17 7:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: David Miller, netdev, Catalin Marinas, Linux-Next, linux-kernel,
Daniel Borkmann, Yang Shi, Will Deacon
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm64/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> 8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition")
>
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
>
> 6077776b5908 ("bpf: split HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant")
>
> 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 arch/arm64/Kconfig
> index 8845c0d100d7,e6761ea2feec..000000000000
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> @@@ -59,9 -58,7 +59,9 @@@ config ARM6
> select HAVE_ARCH_MMAP_RND_COMPAT_BITS if COMPAT
> select HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER
> select HAVE_ARCH_TRACEHOOK
> + select HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> + select HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
> - select HAVE_BPF_JIT
> + select HAVE_EBPF_JIT
> select HAVE_C_RECORDMCOUNT
> select HAVE_CC_STACKPROTECTOR
> select HAVE_CMPXCHG_DOUBLE
Someone's not gonna be happy with commit 6077776b5908 ("bpf: split
HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant") breaking the sort order again...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
2016-05-17 7:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
@ 2016-05-17 7:12 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-05-17 13:38 ` Catalin Marinas
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2016-05-17 7:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Uytterhoeven, Stephen Rothwell
Cc: David Miller, netdev, Catalin Marinas, Linux-Next, linux-kernel,
Yang Shi, Will Deacon
On 05/17/2016 09:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
[...]
> Someone's not gonna be happy with commit 6077776b5908 ("bpf: split
> HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant") breaking the sort order again...
Wasn't aware of that. Maybe I'm missing something, but there appears
to be no throughout consistent ordering ...
[...]
select HAVE_PERF_REGS
select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP
select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE
select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS
select IOMMU_DMA if IOMMU_SUPPORT
select IRQ_DOMAIN
select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING
[...]
select RTC_LIB
select SPARSE_IRQ
select SYSCTL_EXCEPTION_TRACE
select HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING
select HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
[...]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
2016-05-17 7:12 ` Daniel Borkmann
@ 2016-05-17 13:38 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-05-17 13:49 ` Daniel Borkmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Catalin Marinas @ 2016-05-17 13:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Borkmann
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Stephen Rothwell, David Miller, netdev,
Linux-Next, linux-kernel, Yang Shi, Will Deacon
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 09:12:34AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 05/17/2016 09:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> [...]
> >Someone's not gonna be happy with commit 6077776b5908 ("bpf: split
> >HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant") breaking the sort order again...
>
> Wasn't aware of that. Maybe I'm missing something, but there appears
> to be no throughout consistent ordering ...
>
> [...]
> select HAVE_PERF_REGS
> select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP
> select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE
> select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS
> select IOMMU_DMA if IOMMU_SUPPORT
> select IRQ_DOMAIN
> select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING
> [...]
> select RTC_LIB
> select SPARSE_IRQ
> select SYSCTL_EXCEPTION_TRACE
> select HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING
> select HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
> [...]
We keep fixing them as we merge other stuff. For example, latest
mainline has commit 8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant
HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition") which also fixes up the
Kconfig order.
--
Catalin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
2016-05-17 13:38 ` Catalin Marinas
@ 2016-05-17 13:49 ` Daniel Borkmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2016-05-17 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Catalin Marinas
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Stephen Rothwell, David Miller, netdev,
Linux-Next, linux-kernel, Yang Shi, Will Deacon
On 05/17/2016 03:38 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 09:12:34AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 05/17/2016 09:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> [...]
>>> Someone's not gonna be happy with commit 6077776b5908 ("bpf: split
>>> HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant") breaking the sort order again...
>>
>> Wasn't aware of that. Maybe I'm missing something, but there appears
>> to be no throughout consistent ordering ...
>>
>> [...]
>> select HAVE_PERF_REGS
>> select HAVE_PERF_USER_STACK_DUMP
>> select HAVE_RCU_TABLE_FREE
>> select HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS
>> select IOMMU_DMA if IOMMU_SUPPORT
>> select IRQ_DOMAIN
>> select IRQ_FORCED_THREADING
>> [...]
>> select RTC_LIB
>> select SPARSE_IRQ
>> select SYSCTL_EXCEPTION_TRACE
>> select HAVE_CONTEXT_TRACKING
>> select HAVE_ARM_SMCCC
>> [...]
>
> We keep fixing them as we merge other stuff. For example, latest
> mainline has commit 8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant
> HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition") which also fixes up the
> Kconfig order.
Understood, thanks for the clarification (and sorry for the sort order
issue).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
2017-07-03 1:37 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2017-07-03 7:54 ` Daniel Borkmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2017-07-03 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, David Miller, Networking, Catalin Marinas
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Luc Van Oostenryck, Will Deacon
On 07/03/2017 03:37 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 425e1ed73e65 ("arm64: fix endianness annotation for 'struct jit_ctx' and friends")
>
> from the arm64 tree and commit:
>
> f1c9eed7f437 ("bpf, arm64: take advantage of stack_depth tracking")
>
> 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.
Looks good to me, thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree
@ 2017-07-03 1:37 Stephen Rothwell
2017-07-03 7:54 ` Daniel Borkmann
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2017-07-03 1:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Miller, Networking, Catalin Marinas
Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Luc Van Oostenryck, Will Deacon, Daniel Borkmann
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
between commit:
425e1ed73e65 ("arm64: fix endianness annotation for 'struct jit_ctx' and friends")
from the arm64 tree and commit:
f1c9eed7f437 ("bpf, arm64: take advantage of stack_depth tracking")
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 arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 8860bb9c33a1,2f0505b5c240..000000000000
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@@ -70,7 -70,8 +70,8 @@@ struct jit_ctx
int idx;
int epilogue_offset;
int *offset;
- u32 *image;
+ __le32 *image;
+ u32 stack_size;
};
static inline void emit(const u32 insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-07-03 7:54 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-05-17 0:24 linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-05-17 6:05 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-05-17 7:03 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-05-17 7:12 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-05-17 13:38 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-05-17 13:49 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-07-03 1:37 Stephen Rothwell
2017-07-03 7:54 ` Daniel Borkmann
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).