| Message ID | 20221004122428.653bd5cd@canb.auug.org.au (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the bpf tree | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Not a local patch |
On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 12:24:28 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: > > kernel/bpf/helpers.c > > between commit: > > 8addbfc7b308 ("bpf: Gate dynptr API behind CAP_BPF") > > from the bpf tree and commits: > > 8a67f2de9b1d ("bpf: expose bpf_strtol and bpf_strtoul to all program types") > 5679ff2f138f ("bpf: Move bpf_loop and bpf_for_each_map_elem under CAP_BPF") > 205715673844 ("bpf: Add bpf_user_ringbuf_drain() helper") Thanks! Unrelated to the conflict but do you see this when building the latest by any chance? Is it just me and my poor old gcc 8.5? vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: ___ksymtab+bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func+0x0: data relocation to !ENDBR: bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func+0x0 vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: bpf_dispatcher_xdp+0xa0: data relocation to !ENDBR: bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func+0x0
Hi Jakub, On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 19:07:27 -0700 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote: > > Unrelated to the conflict but do you see this when building the latest > by any chance? Is it just me and my poor old gcc 8.5? > > vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: ___ksymtab+bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func+0x0: data relocation to !ENDBR: bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func+0x0 > vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: bpf_dispatcher_xdp+0xa0: data relocation to !ENDBR: bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func+0x0 I don't get those messages.
diff --cc kernel/bpf/helpers.c index 3814b0fd3a2c,b069517a3da0..000000000000 --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: kernel/bpf/helpers.c between commit: 8addbfc7b308 ("bpf: Gate dynptr API behind CAP_BPF") from the bpf tree and commits: 8a67f2de9b1d ("bpf: expose bpf_strtol and bpf_strtoul to all program types") 5679ff2f138f ("bpf: Move bpf_loop and bpf_for_each_map_elem under CAP_BPF") 205715673844 ("bpf: Add bpf_user_ringbuf_drain() helper") from the net-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.