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
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
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>
 <9b338449-e342-96ab-0ba1-a73058fac037@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2aab8efc-783d-8502-d268-ab435f566b06@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jun 2020 07:39:30 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9b338449-e342-96ab-0ba1-a73058fac037@gmail.com>
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 6:44 AM, 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.
> 

I see that both net and net-next still have the conditional in xfrm_output:

#ifdef CONFIG_NETFILTER
                IPCB(skb)->flags |= IPSKB_XFRM_TRANSFORMED;
#endif
                break;
        case AF_INET6:
                memset(IP6CB(skb), 0, sizeof(*IP6CB(skb)));

#ifdef CONFIG_NETFILTER
                IP6CB(skb)->flags |= IP6SKB_XFRM_TRANSFORMED;
#endif

Did you submit the merge fix? If not, I can do it today.