Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753020AbdDCNOX (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 09:14:23 -0400 Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:59663 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752979AbdDCNOW (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 09:14:22 -0400 Message-ID: <58E24AA4.9080204@iogearbox.net> Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 15:14:12 +0200 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 Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Alexei Starovoitov , Martin KaFai Lau Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree References: <20170403120748.2d11f2b0@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20170403120748.2d11f2b0@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 Content-Length: 975 Lines: 27 On 04/03/2017 04:07 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got conflicts in: > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c > > between commit: > > 02ea80b1850e ("bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests") > > from the net tree and commits: > > 6882804c916b ("selftests/bpf: add a test for overlapping packet range checks") > fb30d4b71214 ("bpf: Add tests for map-in-map") > > from the net-next tree. > > I fixed it up (see below - though there are probably more fixups needed) > 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 fine, thanks Stephen!