From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the netfilter tree Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 01:31:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20161110003117.GA4285@salvia> References: <20161110105633.31ebdc76@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:38784 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751582AbcKJAb1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 19:31:27 -0500 Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (unknown [192.168.2.11]) by mail.us.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE1AD9B7F7 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 01:31:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDF8CDA807 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 01:31:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA429DA80C for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 01:31:22 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161110105633.31ebdc76@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: David Miller Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Networking , NetFilter , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, WANG Cong , Johannes Berg Hi David, On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:56:33AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: > > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c > > between commit: > > 8fbfef7f505b ("ipvs: use IPVS_CMD_ATTR_MAX for family.maxattr") > > from the netfilter tree and commit: > > 489111e5c25b ("genetlink: statically initialize families") > > 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. I think I cannot help to address this conflict myself. 8fbfef7f505b is in my nf tree, while 489111e5c25b is in net-next. So you will hit this conflict by when you pull net into net-next. So please keep this patch from Stephen to resolve the conflict in your radar to solve this. Or let me know if you come up with any way I can handle this from here to reduce your burden. Thanks. > diff --cc net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c > index a6e44ef2ec9a,6b85ded4f91d..000000000000 > --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c > +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c > @@@ -3872,10 -3865,20 +3865,20 @@@ static const struct genl_ops ip_vs_genl > }, > }; > > + static struct genl_family ip_vs_genl_family __ro_after_init = { > + .hdrsize = 0, > + .name = IPVS_GENL_NAME, > + .version = IPVS_GENL_VERSION, > - .maxattr = IPVS_CMD_MAX, > ++ .maxattr = IPVS_CMD_ATTR_MAX, > + .netnsok = true, /* Make ipvsadm to work on netns */ > + .module = THIS_MODULE, > + .ops = ip_vs_genl_ops, > + .n_ops = ARRAY_SIZE(ip_vs_genl_ops), > + }; > + > static int __init ip_vs_genl_register(void) > { > - return genl_register_family_with_ops(&ip_vs_genl_family, > - ip_vs_genl_ops); > + return genl_register_family(&ip_vs_genl_family); > } > > static void ip_vs_genl_unregister(void)