From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755122AbcK2Gcn (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Nov 2016 01:32:43 -0500 Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:38923 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754124AbcK2Gcg (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Nov 2016 01:32:36 -0500 Message-ID: <583D20FE.7060707@iogearbox.net> Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 07:32:30 +0100 From: Daniel Borkmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Rothwell , David Miller , Networking CC: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree References: <20161129113126.2626e7fe@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20161129113126.2626e7fe@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-Sender: daniel@iogearbox.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/29/2016 01:31 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: > > net/sched/cls_flower.c > > between commit: > > d936377414fa ("net, sched: respect rcu grace period on cls destruction") > > from the net tree and commit: > > 13fa876ebd03 ("net/sched: cls_flower: merge filter delete/destroy common code") > > 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!