Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree

["Alexei Starovoitov" <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>]

On Thu Sep 24, 2026 at 4:12 PM UTC, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
> On 9/24/26 5:39 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
>> 
>>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cb_refs.c
>> 
>> between commit:
>> 
>>   04ae4ffc57a6b ("selftests/bpf: Check callback map value lock identity")
>> 
>> from the bpf tree and commit:
>> 
>>   11300f54bd887 ("selftests/bpf: Refactor cb_refs selftests")
>> 
>> from the bpf-next tree.
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> (deleted the file, which probably lost the test)
>
> Hi Mark.
>
> I submitted 11300f54bd887 ("selftests/bpf: Refactor cb_refs selftests")
> yesterday to address a non-code conflict between bpf and bpf-next. A
> test would start failing after bpf is merged into bpf-next.
>
> Deleting tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cb_refs.c is correct,
> the tests were moved.
>
> Thank you for resolving this.

+1

bpf tree was cross merged into bpf-next and all conflicts resolved.
Next linux-next should be clean. fingers crossed.