Hi all,
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:12:23 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> net/ipv4/tcp.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 7eeba1706eba ("tcp: Add receive timestamp support for receive zerocopy.")
>
> from the net-next tree and commit:
>
> 9cacf81f8161 ("bpf: Remove extra lock_sock for TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE")
>
> 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.
>
> diff --cc net/ipv4/tcp.c
> index e1a17c6b473c,26aa923cf522..000000000000
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> @@@ -4160,18 -4098,13 +4160,20 @@@ static int do_tcp_getsockopt(struct soc
> if (copy_from_user(&zc, optval, len))
> return -EFAULT;
> lock_sock(sk);
> - err = tcp_zerocopy_receive(sk, &zc);
> + err = tcp_zerocopy_receive(sk, &zc, &tss);
> + err = BPF_CGROUP_RUN_PROG_GETSOCKOPT_KERN(sk, level, optname,
> + &zc, &len, err);
> release_sock(sk);
> - if (len >= offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, err))
> - goto zerocopy_rcv_sk_err;
> + if (len >= offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_flags))
> + goto zerocopy_rcv_cmsg;
> switch (len) {
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_flags):
> + goto zerocopy_rcv_cmsg;
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_controllen):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, msg_control):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, flags):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, copybuf_len):
> + case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, copybuf_address):
> case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, err):
> goto zerocopy_rcv_sk_err;
> case offsetofend(struct tcp_zerocopy_receive, inq):
With the merge window about to open, this is a reminder that this
conflict still exists.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgpI1GA977d0M.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
