From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefano Brivio Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ipsec tree with the net tree Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 19:23:59 +0200 Message-ID: <20180327192359.4b1bb7d6@epycfail> References: <20180326091610.148fc62d@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , Networking , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List To: Petr Machata , Stephen Rothwell , Steffen Klassert Return-path: Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:60778 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752008AbeC0RYG (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 13:24:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:33:43 +0300 Petr Machata wrote: > Hi, this conflict needs to be resolved differently. Below I'm adding a > patch on top of linux-next. Squash or apply as you see fit. Petr, thanks for spotting this. Stephen, you can carry these tags for Petr's patch: Fixes: adab890d00dc ("Merge remote-tracking branch 'ipsec/master'") Reviewed-by: Stefano Brivio Tested-by: Stefano Brivio > What's the right way to proceed from here? It looks to me like Stefano > or Steffen should take this into the ipsec tree (possibly just squash to > the clamping fix), as they'll hit this conflict the next time they > rebase on top of net...? Let me know what to do, please. Steffen, please let me know if you want me to submit anything for the ipsec tree on top of my previous patches. I guess another alternative would be that David fixes the conflict the way Petr solved it, when merging to net? -- Stefano