Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20181217113106.32d98f30@canb.auug.org.au> <20181217100314.GA12765@splinter>
In-Reply-To: <20181217100314.GA12765@splinter>
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 Dec 2018 02:12:47 -0800
Message-ID: <CANn89iJAED9AxeX6BjwvEo204-rHOr0QFFk6v7r3nCHb3_0OYA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-next <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:03 AM Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:31:06AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >   net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >   8203e2d844d3 ("net: clear skb->tstamp in forwarding paths")
> >
> > from the net tree and commit:
> >
> >   f839a6c92504 ("net: Do not route unicast IP packets twice")
> >
> > from the net-next tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I was not quite sure of the correct ordering - 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. Eric?
>
> Thank you!


Yes, SGTM,  thanks.