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;
Date:   Fri, 5 Jun 2020 11:18:27 +0200
From:   Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.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>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec-next tree with Linus' tree
Message-ID: <20200605091827.GD19286@gauss3.secunet.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>
 <9b338449-e342-96ab-0ba1-a73058fac037@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9b338449-e342-96ab-0ba1-a73058fac037@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 06:44:10AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> 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.

The fixup patch from Stephen is now applied to the ipsec tree.