Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with Linus' tree

From: Alexei Starovoitov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 18:24:11 -0700

On 3/23/17 5:10 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:14 +1100
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>>
>>   kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>>   8c290e60fa2a ("bpf: fix hashmap extra_elems logic")
>>
>> from Linus' tree and commit:
>>
>>   bcc6b1b7ebf8 ("bpf: Add hash of maps support")
>>
>> from the net-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.
>
> I did the same resolution just an hour ago when merging net into
> net-next.

yes. that's correct merge conflict resolution.
Just rebuilt and retested. All looks good.
Thanks!