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: <20190627140929.74ae7da6@canb.auug.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <20190627140929.74ae7da6@canb.auug.org.au>
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@dev.mellanox.co.il>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:59:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CALzJLG9pmK-OPK1+iVkKWkKPvPUf0icFKZuUojJej7WR1BtV3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mlx5-next tree with the net-next tree
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@mellanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>,
        Eli Britstein <elibr@mellanox.com>,
        Jianbo Liu <jianbol@mellanox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 9:09 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mlx5-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>   drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eswitch_offloads.c
>
> between commits:
>
>   955858009708 ("net/mlx5e: Fix number of vports for ingress ACL configuration")
>   d4a18e16c570 ("net/mlx5e: Enable setting multiple match criteria for flow group")
>
> from the net-next tree and commits:
>
>   7445cfb1169c ("net/mlx5: E-Switch, Tag packet with vport number in VF vports and uplink ingress ACLs")
>   c01cfd0f1115 ("net/mlx5: E-Switch, Add match on vport metadata for rule in fast path")
>
> from the mlx5-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I basically used the latter versions) 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.
>

Thanks Stephen, this will be handled in my next pull request to net-next.


> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell