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

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:05:27 +1000

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:

  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c

between commits:

  9c82a63cf370 ("libbpf: Fix CO-RE relocs against .text section")
  647b502e3d54 ("selftests/bpf: Refactor some net macros to bpf_tracing_net.h")

from the bpf tree and commit:

  84544f5637ff ("selftests/bpf: Move newer bpf_iter_* type redefining to a new header file")

from the bpf-next tree.

I fixed it up (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

diff --cc tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c
index 75ecf956a2df,cec82a419800..000000000000
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_netlink.c
@@@ -11,21 -7,7 +7,7 @@@
  
  char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
  
- #define sk_rmem_alloc	sk_backlog.rmem_alloc
- #define sk_refcnt	__sk_common.skc_refcnt
- 
- struct bpf_iter_meta {
- 	struct seq_file *seq;
- 	__u64 session_id;
- 	__u64 seq_num;
- } __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
- 
- struct bpf_iter__netlink {
- 	struct bpf_iter_meta *meta;
- 	struct netlink_sock *sk;
- } __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
- 
 -static inline struct inode *SOCK_INODE(struct socket *socket)
 +static __attribute__((noinline)) struct inode *SOCK_INODE(struct socket *socket)
  {
  	return &container_of(socket, struct socket_alloc, socket)->vfs_inode;
  }