Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with Linus' tree
To:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
References: <20200511130015.37103884@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20200602092040.5ef52300@canb.auug.org.au>
 <6092c5eb-6e50-97bc-90db-4f7a0ca29c6e@gmail.com>
 <20200604112606.25ffde35@canb.auug.org.au>
 <8d943a28-2e9f-9c61-9cff-899e907d6b86@gmail.com>
 <20200604064149.GT19286@gauss3.secunet.de>
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9b338449-e342-96ab-0ba1-a73058fac037@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Jun 2020 06:44:10 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200604064149.GT19286@gauss3.secunet.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 6/4/20 12:41 AM, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 08:55:01PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 6/3/20 7:26 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>
>>> And now the net-next tree has been merged into Linus' tree without this fix :-(
>>>
>>
>> I took a look earlier and I think it is fine. Some code was moved around
>> in ipsec-next and I think the merge is good. I'll run the test cases
>> later this week and double check. Thanks for the reminder
> 
> The setting of XFRM_TRANSFORMED moved to xfrm_output() and depends
> on CONFIG_NETFILTER. So I think the fix is needed. After the merge
> of the net tree today, I have both conflicting patches patches in
> the ipsec tree. I'd apply the fix from Stephen unless you say
> it is not needed.
> 

Indeed. I must have been looking at -net. Both -net and -net-next have
it conditional, so yes a fixup patch is needed.