From patchwork Sun Dec  5 23:39:31 2021
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Patchwork-Submitter: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
X-Patchwork-Id: 12657449
X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net
Return-Path: <netdev-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66D4C433EF
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Sun,  5 Dec 2021 23:39:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S241292AbhLEXnL (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 5 Dec 2021 18:43:11 -0500
Received: from gandalf.ozlabs.org ([150.107.74.76]:59557 "EHLO
        gandalf.ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S241256AbhLEXnK (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Sun, 5 Dec 2021 18:43:10 -0500
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 ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)
 server-digest SHA256)
        (No client certificate requested)
        by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4J6jhN6WH2z4xZ4;
        Mon,  6 Dec 2021 10:39:32 +1100 (AEDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au;
        s=201702; t=1638747573;
        bh=OYwEC5U/0QxVL+Ch7IjHIOA46R5CkpweTTN2VWUX0zw=;
        h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:From;
        b=fXK4yh+7HQOMgEtFPMsEhHCMQB9u3DbE8UtphQK48/vGf1ysUSWeX3LCoDxbr0ZNH
         SsFL14dG+1o2Oi+nh2tnzOHF1Ayy1wAEBFvV5h+3UF5Nnm077Ysq3QKKcIInUb3I1A
         W/mI9yhCwpk/pGJdWE1FSlVfJfQGpO5A1LmqDjjIKwJa7JB/B98VhaL63awa4e56ar
         luWMftw+K7qWpRIzLv9b/Ll1mFONqtJwaYG73lAWJ9M+h6oU6fPrBqFY1O+GyR1dEC
         aTzt5sumchNhpG4WriFw8O4oEcqQpl5KAHI4pqkA/Du32yWRCaTJPU46kA1YkOMqD6
         c8Nj6w2MNXGPA==
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 10:39:31 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the bpf tree
Message-ID: <20211206103931.5e75b1a7@canb.auug.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:

  kernel/bpf/btf.c

between commit:

  d9847eb8be3d ("bpf: Make CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF depend upon CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL")

from the bpf tree and commit:

  29db4bea1d10 ("bpf: Prepare relo_core.c for kernel duty.")

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.

diff --cc kernel/bpf/btf.c
index 48cdf5b425a7,36a5cc0f53c6..000000000000
--- a/kernel/bpf/btf.c