On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 05:55:31AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-03-23 at 13:47 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 02:08:41PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in
> > > net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c between commit 4017a7ee693d ("netfilter:
> > > restore rule tracing via nfnetlink_log") from the net tree and commit
> > > 01ef16c2dd2e ("netfilter: nf_tables: minor tracing cleanups") from the
> > > net-next tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> > > is required).
> > "
> > This looks good, thanks for adressing this conflict Stephen.
>
> trivia:
>
> > > diff --cc net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c
> []
> > > + static struct nf_loginfo trace_loginfo = {
> > > + .type = NF_LOG_TYPE_LOG,
> > > + .u = {
> > > + .log = {
> > > + .level = 4,
>
> Perhaps all the .level = 4 uses should be LOGLEVEL_WARNING
> and .level = 5 should be LOGLEVEL_NOTICE
Yes, we can push a follow up patch to net-next changing all these
spots in the netfilter tree. Would you send a patch for this?
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
