Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi all, On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 19:30:48 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > between commit: > > b36e62eb8521 ("bpf: Use strncpy_from_unsafe_strict() in bpf_seq_printf() > helper") > > from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c between commit: b36e62eb8521 ("bpf: Use strncpy_from_unsafe_strict() in bpf_seq_printf() helper") from the net-next tree and patch: "bpf:bpf_seq_printf(): handle potentially unsafe format

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: net/ipv6/sysctl_net_ipv6.c between commit: 00dc3307c0f7 ("net/ipv6: Fix misuse of proc_dointvec "flowlabel_reflect"") from the net-next tree and patch: "proc-sysctl-add-shared-variables-for-range-check-fix-2-fix"

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: net/ipv6/route.c between commit: 6802f3adcb3f ("ipv6: Fix build with gcc-4.4.5") from the net-next tree and patch: "net/ipv6/route.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 anon union initializer issue" from the akpm tree.

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: net/ipv6/route.c between commit: 6802f3adcb3f ("ipv6: Fix build with gcc-4.4.5") from the net-next tree and patch: "net/ipv6/route.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 anon union initializer issue" from the akpm tree.

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/brcm,unimac-mdio.txt between commit: 0ce5aa1d6c97 ("dt-bindings: net: update bcmgenet binding for GENETv5") from the net-next tree and patch: "scripts/spelling.txt: Add

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/brcm,unimac-mdio.txt between commit: 0ce5aa1d6c97 ("dt-bindings: net: update bcmgenet binding for GENETv5") from the net-next tree and patch: "scripts/spelling.txt: Add

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Marc, On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 09:40:09 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > > On 02/07/2017 06:23 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > diff --cc drivers/net/can/flexcan.c > > index ea57fed375c6,4dc71bce525c.. > > --- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c > > +++

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Marc, On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 09:40:09 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > > On 02/07/2017 06:23 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > diff --cc drivers/net/can/flexcan.c > > index ea57fed375c6,4dc71bce525c.. > > --- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan.c > > @@@ -195,9

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 02/07/2017 06:23 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/net/can/flexcan.c > > between commits: > > 9eb7aa891101 ("can: flexcan: add quirk FLEXCAN_QUIRK_ENABLE_EACEN_RRS") > b3cf53e988ce ("can: flexcan: add

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 02/07/2017 06:23 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: > > drivers/net/can/flexcan.c > > between commits: > > 9eb7aa891101 ("can: flexcan: add quirk FLEXCAN_QUIRK_ENABLE_EACEN_RRS") > b3cf53e988ce ("can: flexcan: add

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: drivers/net/can/flexcan.c between commits: 9eb7aa891101 ("can: flexcan: add quirk FLEXCAN_QUIRK_ENABLE_EACEN_RRS") b3cf53e988ce ("can: flexcan: add support for timestamp based rx-offload") from the net-next tree and

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in: drivers/net/can/flexcan.c between commits: 9eb7aa891101 ("can: flexcan: add quirk FLEXCAN_QUIRK_ENABLE_EACEN_RRS") b3cf53e988ce ("can: flexcan: add support for timestamp based rx-offload") from the net-next tree and

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/bridge/br_stp.c between commit 42275bd8fcb3 ("switchdev: don't use anonymous union on switchdev attr/obj structs") from the net-next tree and commit "net/bridge/br_stp.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 initializer bug" from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/switchdev/switchdev.c between commit 42275bd8fcb3 ("switchdev: don't use anonymous union on switchdev attr/obj structs") from the net-next tree and commit "net/switchdev/switchdev.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 initializer bug"

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/switchdev/switchdev.c between commit 42275bd8fcb3 (switchdev: don't use anonymous union on switchdev attr/obj structs) from the net-next tree and commit net/switchdev/switchdev.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 initializer bug from

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/bridge/br_stp.c between commit 42275bd8fcb3 (switchdev: don't use anonymous union on switchdev attr/obj structs) from the net-next tree and commit net/bridge/br_stp.c: work around gcc-4.4.4 initializer bug from the akpm

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/device.c between commit da388973d4a1 ("iw_cxgb4: fix for 64-bit integer division") from the net-next tree and commit "drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/device.c: fix 32-bit builds" from the akpm tree. I

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/device.c between commit da388973d4a1 (iw_cxgb4: fix for 64-bit integer division) from the net-next tree and commit drivers/infiniband/hw/cxgb4/device.c: fix 32-bit builds from the akpm tree. I

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/netfilter/ipset/ip_set_hash_netportnet.c between commit 1a869205c75c ("netfilter: ipset: The unnamed union initialization may lead to compilation error") from the net-next tree and commit

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/netfilter/ipset/ip_set_hash_netnet.c between commit 1a869205c75c ("netfilter: ipset: The unnamed union initialization may lead to compilation error") from the net-next tree and commit

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/netfilter/ipset/ip_set_hash_netnet.c between commit 1a869205c75c (netfilter: ipset: The unnamed union initialization may lead to compilation error) from the net-next tree and commit

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/netfilter/ipset/ip_set_hash_netportnet.c between commit 1a869205c75c (netfilter: ipset: The unnamed union initialization may lead to compilation error) from the net-next tree and commit

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 05/22/2013 01:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Daniel, On Tue, 21 May 2013 09:44:13 +0200 Daniel Borkmann wrote: Also seccomp_jit_free() needs a change otherwise the kernel won't build with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT enabled since the work_struct is initialized with the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 05/22/2013 09:19 AM, David Miller wrote: From: Andrew Morton Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 00:14:58 -0700 On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:07:48 -0700 (PDT) David Miller wrote: From: Andrew Morton Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700 Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

From: Andrew Morton Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 00:14:58 -0700 > On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:07:48 -0700 (PDT) David Miller > wrote: > >> From: Andrew Morton >> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700 >> >> > Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the versions >> > which I presently

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:07:48 -0700 (PDT) David Miller wrote: > From: Andrew Morton > Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700 > > > Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the versions > > which I presently have. Please refresh, retest and resend when > > convenient? It'll

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

From: Andrew Morton Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700 > Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the versions > which I presently have. Please refresh, retest and resend when > convenient? It'll need to be against linux-next, which is where the > conflicting

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

From: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700 Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the versions which I presently have. Please refresh, retest and resend when convenient? It'll need to be against linux-next, which is where the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:07:48 -0700 (PDT) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700 Nicolas, I think the patches need a re-check so I'll drop the versions which I presently have. Please refresh, retest and

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

From: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 00:14:58 -0700 On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:07:48 -0700 (PDT) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38 -0700 Nicolas, I think the patches need a

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 05/22/2013 09:19 AM, David Miller wrote: From: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 00:14:58 -0700 On Wed, 22 May 2013 00:07:48 -0700 (PDT) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 13:04:38

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 05/22/2013 01:54 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Daniel, On Tue, 21 May 2013 09:44:13 +0200 Daniel Borkmann dbork...@redhat.com wrote: Also seccomp_jit_free() needs a change otherwise the kernel won't build with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT enabled since the work_struct is initialized with the

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Daniel, On Tue, 21 May 2013 09:44:13 +0200 Daniel Borkmann wrote: > > Also seccomp_jit_free() needs a change otherwise the kernel won't build > with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT enabled since the work_struct is initialized > with the bpf_jit_free_worker() callback, which is no longer existent. >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On Tue, 21 May 2013 14:29:48 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in > arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd ("arm: bpf_jit: can > call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit > "bpf:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Stephen, On 05/21/2013 06:25 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd ("arm: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit "ARM: net:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Stephen, On 05/21/2013 06:25 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd (arm: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context) from the net-next tree and commit ARM: net: bpf_jit:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On Tue, 21 May 2013 14:29:48 +1000 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au wrote: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd (arm: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context) from the net-next tree and

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Daniel, On Tue, 21 May 2013 09:44:13 +0200 Daniel Borkmann dbork...@redhat.com wrote: Also seccomp_jit_free() needs a change otherwise the kernel won't build with CONFIG_SECCOMP_FILTER_JIT enabled since the work_struct is initialized with the bpf_jit_free_worker() callback, which is no

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit ed900ffb73e3 ("ppc: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit "bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation" from the akpm

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd ("arm: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit "bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation" from the akpm tree.

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd ("arm: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit "ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter"

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd (arm: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context) from the net-next tree and commit ARM: net: bpf_jit: make code generation less dependent on struct sk_filter from

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/arm/net/bpf_jit_32.c between commit aafc787e41fd (arm: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context) from the net-next tree and commit bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation from the akpm tree.

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit ed900ffb73e3 (ppc: bpf_jit: can call module_free() from any context) from the net-next tree and commit bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation from the akpm

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit 650c8496702f ("x86: bpf_jit_comp: can call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit "bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation" from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/sparc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit 5199dfe531db ("sparc: bpf_jit_comp: can call module_free() from any context") from the net-next tree and commit "bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation" from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/sparc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit 5199dfe531db (sparc: bpf_jit_comp: can call module_free() from any context) from the net-next tree and commit bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit 650c8496702f (x86: bpf_jit_comp: can call module_free() from any context) from the net-next tree and commit bpf: add comments explaining the schedule_work() operation from the akpm

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 02/20/2013 02:02 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/core/dev.c between commit 900ff8c63214 ("net: move procfs code to net/core/net-procfs.c") from the net-next tree and commit "hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators"

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/core/dev.c between commit 900ff8c63214 ("net: move procfs code to net/core/net-procfs.c") from the net-next tree and commit "hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators" from the akpm tree. I fixed it up (see below) and

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/core/dev.c between commit 900ff8c63214 (net: move procfs code to net/core/net-procfs.c) from the net-next tree and commit hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators from the akpm tree. I fixed it up (see below) and can

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

On 02/20/2013 02:02 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/core/dev.c between commit 900ff8c63214 (net: move procfs code to net/core/net-procfs.c) from the net-next tree and commit hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators from

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/bridge/br_fdb.c between commit 2ba071ecb6d4 ("bridge: Add vlan to unicast fdb entries") from the net-next tree and commit "hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators" from the akpm tree. I fixed it up (see below) and

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the net-next tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in net/bridge/br_fdb.c between commit 2ba071ecb6d4 (bridge: Add vlan to unicast fdb entries) from the net-next tree and commit hlist: drop the node parameter from iterators from the akpm tree. I fixed it up (see below) and can