lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the bpf tree
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:41 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:37 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > f6be4d16039b ("selftests/bpf: make sure signal interrupts BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN")
>
> Ouch. Thanks for the heads up.
>
> Daniel,
> should we drop this one from bpf tree ?
> I don't think it's strictly necessary.
Yeah, those can go via the bpf-next three as well, not very critical.

OTOH, I don't understand why is there a conflict? bpf and bpf-next
adding tests in the same place/file? Those can be trivially resolved
when bpf and bpf-next are merged in the next window.
>
> > from the bpf tree and commits:
> >
> > bf0f0fd93945 ("selftests/bpf: add simple BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN examples for flow dissector")
> > ab963beb9f5d ("selftests/bpf: add bpf_spin_lock C test")
> > ba72a7b4badb ("selftests/bpf: test for BPF_F_LOCK")
> >

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-20 01:46    [W:0.056 / U:26.288 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site