From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A189C63777 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:41:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F9221D40 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:41:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390728AbgKZNll (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:41:41 -0500 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:37298 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390709AbgKZNlk (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2020 08:41:40 -0500 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out03.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1kiHWk-00FtFp-7u; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:41:38 -0700 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95] helo=x220.xmission.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1kiHWj-0003Ma-5I; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:41:38 -0700 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Daniel Borkmann , Alexei Starovoitov , Networking , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Song Liu References: <20201126162248.7e7963fe@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 07:41:12 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20201126162248.7e7963fe@canb.auug.org.au> (Stephen Rothwell's message of "Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:22:48 +1100") Message-ID: <87a6v4nslj.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1kiHWj-0003Ma-5I;;;mid=<87a6v4nslj.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=68.227.160.95;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX19590D4YxTqaZNbKHQ7oHvcJ0XZUjADk20= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the userns tree with the bpf-next tree X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in: > > kernel/bpf/task_iter.c > > between commit: > > 91b2db27d3ff ("bpf: Simplify task_file_seq_get_next()") > > from the bpf-next tree and commit: > > edc52f17257a ("bpf/task_iter: In task_file_seq_get_next use task_lookup_next_fd_rcu") > > from the userns tree. > > I fixed it up (I think, 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. Thanks. Reading through the diff that looks right, and it has been already reported. Eric