Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net tree

From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>,
	Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	kernel-team <kernel-team@cloudflare.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the net tree
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:14:49 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQKmOLkd1oJHCxfqQnSbJFfp0NRd1C9i9mZy_3rNRc4a1A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+FuTSdQWKFam0KwCg_REZdhNB6+BOwAHL00eRgrJ2FwPDRjcA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:50 AM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > TBH, I don't what is the preferred way to handle it. Perhaps DaveM or
> > Alexei/Daniel can say what would make their life easiest?
>
> Good point.
>
> With the above, there still remains a merge conflict, of course. But
> then we can take bpf-next as is, so I think it would save a separate
> patch to net. But not sure whether that helps anything. It does add an
> unnecessary variable.

whichever way is easier to deal with merge conflict....
currently bpf-next PR is pending.
but we can drop it and merge one more patch into bpf-next?
But reading through the read it doesn't sound that it will help the
merge conflict..
An alternative could be to drop PR and rebase the whole bpf-next to net-next
and deal with conflicts there...
Or I can rebase bpf-next and drop Jakub's series and he can resubmit them
without conflicts? I guess that's the easiest for me and for Dave.