Hi Masami, On 10/31/24 10:25, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 04:43:26 +0000 (UTC) > bot+bpf-ci@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> Dear patch submitter, >> >> CI has tested the following submission: >> Status: CONFLICT >> Name: [v18,00/17] tracing: fprobe: function_graph: Multi-function graph and fprobe on fgraph >> Patchwork: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=903367&state=* >> PR: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/pull/7959 >> >> Please rebase your submission onto the most recent upstream change and resubmit >> the patch to get it tested again. >> >> >> Please note: this email is coming from an unmonitored mailbox. If you have >> questions or feedback, please reach out to the Meta Kernel CI team at >> kernel-ci@xxxxxxxx. > > Hmm what is the actual basement branch/tree? I guess it is based on bpf. > I'm using the latest linux-trace/for-next. > > Thank you, > Yes, it's using bpf as target tree. Reason this happens is b/c patchset is sent to bpf list but no tag was provided. So KPD guesses and bpf tree is first in list of guesses. If you have ideas on how to better handle this please let us know. Thanks, Daniel
