From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934032AbeCGQlo (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2018 11:41:44 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:53876 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933386AbeCGQll (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2018 11:41:41 -0500 Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 11:41:39 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20180307.114139.680250568317481879.davem@davemloft.net> To: paul@paul-moore.com Cc: lucien.xin@gmail.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, richard_c_haines@btinternet.com Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the net-next tree From: David Miller In-Reply-To: References: <20180305124054.09966cb0@canb.auug.org.au> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 25.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Paul Moore Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 11:34:31 -0500 > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:03 AM, Xin Long wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:40 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi Paul, >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in: >>> >>> net/sctp/socket.c >>> >>> between several refactoring commits from the net-next tree and commit: >>> >>> 2277c7cd75e3 ("sctp: Add LSM hooks") >>> >>> from the selinux tree. >>> >>> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as >> The fixup is great! the same as I mentioned in: >> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/879898/ >> for net-next.git >> >>> 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. >> >> [net-next,0/9] sctp: clean up sctp_sendmsg, this patchset was just applied >> in net-next. So I just guess it might not yet be there when selinux tree was >> being submitted. > > The selinux/next branch is based on v4.16-rc1 and doesn't feed into > the netdev tree, it goes straight to Linus during the merge window so > unfortunately I think we may need to carry this for some time and > relay this fix-up patch up to Linus during the merge window. What a mess. The SCTP option changes should have gone through my tree in retrospect.