Received: by 2002:ac0:a679:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id p54csp19031imp; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 17:10:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbdszSR3IFjGzepKvwgSTZRExUtowL/uUrhAT0e4GUnz9FXPIbGLrAzhb1OQZd3OwCPeQty X-Received: by 2002:a63:e410:: with SMTP id a16mr26824557pgi.28.1550625012514; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 17:10:12 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1550625012; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=MzMWM8VxzUbHXuZ5N9vNnGIE+CLCUMK3VS47S5xJJy989OM7SUm7ykNFg3J+JAM4Uc Ys7sbySgUH5B/2ygI5xKAKxoc0/6bYYAXWp1pnfGxF+8PMvbdXZGaphYsOwxw8LiaMuv 5GGBbE98O4INFwjLr9CqWS5XZcuteIKCYTfmlTarRSWrmd7dgV0+gsxiK5VQJ88LnyNs IVKDdn0fPpHUfthaBYU0srpudf3dv7BNluBJvoSJBhliLKaMnJ+j+107Moshv9ZaVF1e 55GGPot4MYm+Ohbwv3D6tyymALzOBFtYXcQsrBPztV4DBfgK8vLifunyAUY7KYEHN3lt 1JMg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=qLTnEYWx1OPEwZ5ksCV4EHV6mcCLVxOA15JUtq6EXwo=; b=oNsM0YNBFCtLCQo3jSkxmNyOpqIdqvo7IBXtvfmkDFGPN+9ut/eGDnUl3fNYUgz4GJ lnJTpUq5+3Hld6hT2j2svnxmpS2zVoRpEQjmxFPghk/tCvIrx39DFQuFEfmDLaY858xQ w2inasDgUr45/86WbTPFuoaCTs6BVj01wCK//zX2G6XwLfvqAmoTKN2cCEWUCGVd0v3Z yStE0zDOyS6qBcSPmLjSealbBa7+ZNo8AjYEmm9DQttlXMVT6gbI6TetlgoUcBtmfrZ6 FrmjKakN1v5aaXZfuzv6eW8klBP2febpH4Q4K/eyFU6XvG4NhY5lLCIkwBUTJ8V0ue6Q 7kig== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x18si15129043pfm.39.2019.02.19.17.09.57; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 17:10:12 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730217AbfBTBH4 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 19 Feb 2019 20:07:56 -0500 Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:33972 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726084AbfBTBH4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2019 20:07:56 -0500 Received: from [78.46.172.2] (helo=sslproxy05.your-server.de) by www62.your-server.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89_1) (envelope-from ) id 1gwG4I-0002BX-Ma; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:48:58 +0100 Received: from [178.197.248.36] (helo=linux.home) by sslproxy05.your-server.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gwG4I-0003Dm-Er; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:48:58 +0100 Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the bpf tree To: Alexei Starovoitov , Stephen Rothwell Cc: David Miller , Networking , Alexei Starovoitov , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Stanislav Fomichev References: <20190220113729.49f28f73@canb.auug.org.au> From: Daniel Borkmann Message-ID: <791e9e85-411e-385b-302f-4a4224f76286@iogearbox.net> Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 01:48:57 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-Sender: daniel@iogearbox.net X-Virus-Scanned: Clear (ClamAV 0.100.2/25365/Tue Feb 19 11:36:48 2019) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/20/2019 01:41 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:37 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: >> >> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c >> >> between commit: >> >> f6be4d16039b ("selftests/bpf: make sure signal interrupts BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN") > > Ouch. Thanks for the heads up. > > Daniel, > should we drop this one from bpf tree ? > I don't think it's strictly necessary. Yeah no objections, lets move the selftest one over to bpf-next and have it properly integrated. I think test_progs might potentially need further topic-split aside from kernel progs like we did in test_verifier. >> from the bpf tree and commits: >> >> bf0f0fd93945 ("selftests/bpf: add simple BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN examples for flow dissector") >> ab963beb9f5d ("selftests/bpf: add bpf_spin_lock C test") >> ba72a7b4badb ("selftests/bpf: test for BPF_F_LOCK")