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

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 12:12:06 +1000

Hi all,

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

  kernel/bpf/helpers.c

between commit:

  535b070f4a80 ("bpf: Introduce bpf_cgroup_read_xattr to read xattr of cgroup's node")

from the vfs-brauner tree and commit:

  e91370550f1f ("bpf: Add kfuncs for read-only string operations")

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 kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 9ff1b4090289,2cdcf7b2c91e..000000000000
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@@ -3397,9 -3768,17 +3768,20 @@@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_dmabuf_next
  BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_iter_dmabuf_destroy, KF_ITER_DESTROY | KF_SLEEPABLE)
  #endif
  BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, __bpf_trap)
 +#ifdef CONFIG_CGROUPS
 +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_cgroup_read_xattr, KF_RCU)
 +#endif
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strcmp);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strchr);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strchrnul);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strnchr);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strrchr);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strlen);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strnlen);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strspn);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strcspn);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strstr);
+ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_strnstr);
  BTF_KFUNCS_END(common_btf_ids)
  
  static const struct btf_kfunc_id_set common_kfunc_set = {