Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the s390 tree

On 05/09/2018 06:21 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Tue, 8 May 2018 10:26:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell > wrote: >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in: >> >> arch/s390/net/bpf_jit.S >> >> between commit: >> >> de5cb6eb514e ("s390: use expoline thunks

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the s390 tree

Hi all, On Tue, 8 May 2018 10:26:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in: > > arch/s390/net/bpf_jit.S > > between commit: > > de5cb6eb514e ("s390: use expoline thunks in the BPF JIT") > > from the s390 tree and commit: > > e

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the s390 tree

On 05/08/2018 02:26 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in: > > arch/s390/net/bpf_jit.S > > between commit: > > de5cb6eb514e ("s390: use expoline thunks in the BPF JIT") > > from the s390 tree and commit: > > e1cf4befa29

linux-next: manual merge of the bpf-next tree with the s390 tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in: arch/s390/net/bpf_jit.S between commit: de5cb6eb514e ("s390: use expoline thunks in the BPF JIT") from the s390 tree and commit: e1cf4befa297 ("bpf, s390x: remove ld_abs/ld_ind") from the bpf-next tree. I fixed i