Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
net/sched/cls_flower.c
between commit:
35cc3cefc4de ("net/sched: cls_flower: Reject duplicated rules also under skip_sw")
from the net tree and commit:
5c72299fba9d ("net: sched: cls_flower: Classify packets using port ranges")
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 net/sched/cls_flower.c
index 71312d7bd8f4,85e9f8e1da10..000000000000
--- a/net/sched/cls_flower.c
+++ b/net/sched/cls_flower.c
@@@ -1238,16 -1355,18 +1355,16 @@@ static int fl_change(struct net *net, s
if (err)
goto errout_idr;
- if (!fold && fl_lookup(fnew->mask, &fnew->mkey)) {
- if (!tc_skip_sw(fnew->flags)) {
- if (!fold && __fl_lookup(fnew->mask, &fnew->mkey)) {
- err = -EEXIST;
- goto errout_mask;
- }
-
- err = rhashtable_insert_fast(&fnew->mask->ht, &fnew->ht_node,
- fnew->mask->filter_ht_params);
- if (err)
- goto errout_mask;
++ if (!fold && __fl_lookup(fnew->mask, &fnew->mkey)) {
+ err = -EEXIST;
+ goto errout_mask;
}
+ err = rhashtable_insert_fast(&fnew->mask->ht, &fnew->ht_node,
+ fnew->mask->filter_ht_params);
+ if (err)
+ goto errout_mask;
+
if (!tc_skip_hw(fnew->flags)) {
err = fl_hw_replace_filter(tp, fnew, extack);
if (err)
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 3:38 AM Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> net/sched/cls_flower.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 35cc3cefc4de ("net/sched: cls_flower: Reject duplicated rules also under skip_sw")
>
> from the net tree and commit:
>
> 5c72299fba9d ("net: sched: cls_flower: Classify packets using port ranges")
>
> from the net-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
[..]
The fix LGTM, thanks for addressing this.
Or.
On 12/9/2018 5:36 PM, 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:
>
> 35cc3cefc4de ("net/sched: cls_flower: Reject duplicated rules also under skip_sw")
>
> from the net tree and commit:
>
> 5c72299fba9d ("net: sched: cls_flower: Classify packets using port ranges")
>
> 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!