From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67E6E6A332; Wed, 17 Jul 2024 23:59:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721260765; cv=none; b=izpD2hYAOBhJBg0pmTJiK3bhWMCxa6wlthHZuPOtiPkFDU4CRlhFEP1V8OAIM+r74alIRU3TfC5y58NnrfcdASwpgiVG1gCiEfLIh1JmXlqT9DP8GnBLyebYG7MG5s8qVgFYIc9oz7IVRp4A+pJa0lnSwhL3Dk9BH+vjjENU660= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721260765; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uHHDX10Mmadmwn6A7ZG/22VWyNM5ZdwL/k8upgEJCRY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=caPHb1N3L2S5CR5tGbvrBq+2ke1+mQajkuerthEFp1C16HWq3hhhF0FEWoXvSk9mTVYgjWPKTkGRnQVq9loDFJm8He478VZ6nbZ8GV6XOIGj2O6zhCvpyS0H9HsjZ+0w9pKHyiDqK8XMsRljzZ0V+bkn+qv6Q2j+lj2YAHHaaZk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b=MZaVdVjj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canb.auug.org.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b="MZaVdVjj" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=201702; t=1721260761; bh=HNAD2TzP2tdT9UZ/RqiaOzX6n/bA7D/ydjF9zjFPRuo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=MZaVdVjj7tZsDuipMkR2aUf2s4R56yy/xZsj6ABR9NET7qPqedH6iRlqbVfsLJCu/ +hDHz6qY/MO6QlF8pkXM6p8ECz8GaA5sfB8nMC9VSPy3R+H4fLt8gbRzJ3nKt7gxm8 JLt3mZEzx/271Fv7rMg2SBaJvoN4NuTjDcseBLKC0qpVlJ/00ThmRAJufmL+UjQgz2 HemoU+nwx9BuVZ9eBSRixbq1Q6aewhgoKqz3HSxtpFAXbzAsWc0e6iJdVnPdB3GTGP U8ic53zYVsf+6TxVKieyxa9tHLsrDI+3r1UzdOm5Clz9Uss56I2L5d4A6o02LP+OtP WHNyKn6N2KaaQ== Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4WPXwQ62f1z4wbh; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 09:59:18 +1000 (AEST) Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 09:59:18 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni Cc: Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , bpf , Networking , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Palmer Dabbelt , Pu Lehui , Samuel Holland Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the risc-v tree Message-ID: <20240718095918.5684ebf0@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20240710132629.781c55e4@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20240702113350.064e4cf2@canb.auug.org.au> <20240710132629.781c55e4@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/Jkw8XGc+u1_70MC+5sdgO8+"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 --Sig_/Jkw8XGc+u1_70MC+5sdgO8+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 13:26:29 +1000 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 11:33:50 +1000 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > >=20 > > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in: > >=20 > > arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > >=20 > > between commit: > >=20 > > 51781ce8f448 ("riscv: Pass patch_text() the length in bytes") > >=20 > > from the risc-v tree and commit: > >=20 > > 9f1e16fb1fc9 ("riscv, bpf: Fix out-of-bounds issue when preparing tra= mpoline image") > >=20 > > from the bpf-next tree. > >=20 > > I fixed it up (see below) 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. > >=20 > > --=20 > > Cheers, > > Stephen Rothwell > >=20 > > diff --cc arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > index 7a34e5b44fc4,351e1484205e..000000000000 > > --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > @@@ -16,7 -16,8 +16,9 @@@ > > #include "bpf_jit.h" > > =20 > > #define RV_FENTRY_NINSNS 2 > > +#define RV_FENTRY_NBYTES (RV_FENTRY_NINSNS * 4) > > + /* imm that allows emit_imm to emit max count insns */ > > + #define RV_MAX_COUNT_IMM 0x7FFF7FF7FF7FF7FF > > =20 > > #define RV_REG_TCC RV_REG_A6 > > #define RV_REG_TCC_SAVED RV_REG_S6 /* Store A6 in S6 if program do ca= lls */ =20 >=20 > This is now a conflict between the risc-v tree and the net-next tree. And now a conflict between the risc-v tree and Linus' tree. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/Jkw8XGc+u1_70MC+5sdgO8+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmaYWtYACgkQAVBC80lX 0GyR1gf+KAKg5oLtV+jWKGm2Acob5mKEEfTl4Z7p6kkICzD9eQoAYAB9bLtuHxUa hGOxJaOrjcdVgCUicuyuqwua9RcGw3N5zyRCikYUJrNKG+SiSwIKgj/TpMAehzBX XgQCzLbiuI5pzcQFNRNI3M0wO5gjczD4QYAr7JG0I6yT+5zJUjFtUfFKg/Lgssak 5USYZ41Y+meCV8qxWKyx8lot0e9A+iNucyDrIPAbmbg+hpxiomTsw5RdZ8tveI/E WEmQSsrfdpSv8Y2tlHRczMSgxppl7AQ0LnhFVtj7XcAb9Hzov5F7meI9Neou7UsN nJUwxOudABdLCdLM0gGHWYiq3djvtw== =+pLu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Jkw8XGc+u1_70MC+5sdgO8+--