Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2017-07-03 Thread Daniel Borkmann
On 07/03/2017 03:37 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit: 425e1ed73e65 ("arm64: fix endianness annotation for 'struct jit_ctx' and friends") from the arm64 tree and commit:

linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2017-07-02 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c between commit: 425e1ed73e65 ("arm64: fix endianness annotation for 'struct jit_ctx' and friends") from the arm64 tree and commit: f1c9eed7f437 ("bpf, arm64: take advantage of

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2016-05-17 Thread Daniel Borkmann
On 05/17/2016 03:38 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 09:12:34AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: On 05/17/2016 09:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: [...] Someone's not gonna be happy with commit 606b5908 ("bpf: split HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant") breaking the sort

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2016-05-17 Thread Catalin Marinas
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 09:12:34AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 05/17/2016 09:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > [...] > >Someone's not gonna be happy with commit 606b5908 ("bpf: split > >HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant") breaking the sort order again... > > Wasn't aware of

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2016-05-17 Thread Daniel Borkmann
On 05/17/2016 09:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: [...] Someone's not gonna be happy with commit 606b5908 ("bpf: split HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and eBPF variant") breaking the sort order again... Wasn't aware of that. Maybe I'm missing something, but there appears to be no throughout

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2016-05-17 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: > > arch/arm64/Kconfig > > between commit: > > 8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant > HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition") >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2016-05-17 Thread Daniel Borkmann
On 05/17/2016 02:24 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/Kconfig between commit: 8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition") from the arm64 tree and commit:

linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the arm64 tree

2016-05-16 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in: arch/arm64/Kconfig between commit: 8ee708792e1c ("arm64: Kconfig: remove redundant HAVE_ARCH_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE definition") from the arm64 tree and commit: 606b5908 ("bpf: split HAVE_BPF_JIT into cBPF and