From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xin Long Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the net-next tree Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 21:12:28 +0800 Message-ID: References: <20180305124054.09966cb0@canb.auug.org.au> <20180308130703.7365f733@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: David Miller , Networking , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Richard Haines , Stephen Rothwell To: Paul Moore Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> On Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:40:54 +1100 Stephen Rothwell 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.