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

[Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:40:54 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>>   net/sctp/socket.c
>>>
>>> between several refactoring commits from the net-next tree and commit:
>>>
>>>   2277c7cd75e3 ("sctp: Add LSM hooks")
>>>
>>> from the selinux tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (I think - 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.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Stephen Rothwell
>>
>> The resolution now looks like below (there were more changes to this
>> file in the net-next tree).  It will keep changing every time this file
>> is touched :-(
>
> Xin Long, does this still look okay to you?
Yes, it's good.

I forgot "struct sctp_af *af;" would be there there when submitting:

   commit 2c0dbaa sctp: add support for SCTP_DSTADDRV4/6 Information for sendmsg

and should have put some notes for David.

Thanks for your reminding.