From: David Miller <da...@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kun...@amazon.co.jp>
> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 01:52:27 +0900
>
> > This patch removes an unnecessary variable in udp[46]_lib_lookup2() and
> > makes it easier to resolve a merge conflict with bpf-next reported in
> > the link below.
> >
> > Link:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20200722132143.700a5...@canb.auug.org.au/
> > Fixes: efc6b6f6c311 ("udp: Improve load balancing for SO_REUSEPORT.")
> > Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kun...@amazon.co.jp>
> > Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <ja...@cloudflare.com>
> > Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.ker...@gmail.com>
>
> This doesn't apply to net-next.
Yes. I think this kind of patch should be submitted to net-next, but this
is for the net tree. Please let me add more description.
Currently, the net and net-next trees conflict in udp[46]_lib_lookup2()
between
efc6b6f6c311 ("udp: Improve load balancing for SO_REUSEPORT.")
and
7629c73a1466 ("udp: Extract helper for selecting socket from reuseport
group")
2a08748cd384 ("udp6: Extract helper for selecting socket from reuseport
group")
.
The conflict is reported in the link[0] and Jakub suggested how to resolve
it[1]. To ease the merge conflict, Jakub and I have to send follow up patches to
the bpf-next and net trees.
Now, his patchset (7629c73a1466 and 2a08748cd384) to bpf-next is merged
into net-next, and his follow up patch is applied in bpf-next[2].
I fixed a bug in efc6b6f6c311, but it introduced an unnecessary variable
and made the conflict worse. So I sent this follow up patch to net tree.
However, I do not know the best way to resolve the conflict, so any comments
are welcome.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20200722132143.700a5...@canb.auug.org.au/
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/87wo2vwxq6....@cloudflare.com/
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20200722165902.51857-1-kun...@amazon.co.jp/T/#t
Best Regards,
Kuniyuki
