lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs tree
From
Date
On 1/19/20 6:40 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 22:34:59 -0700 Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/19/19 6:36 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
>>>
>>> fs/open.c
>>>
>>> between commit:
>>>
>>> 0a51692d49ec ("open: introduce openat2(2) syscall")
>>>
>>> from the vfs tree and commit:
>>>
>>> 252270311374 ("fs: make build_open_flags() available internally")
>>>
>>> from the block tree.
>>>
>>> I fixed it up (see at end, plus the merge fix patch 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.
>>
>> Thanks Stephen, I may just pull in the vfs tree to avoid this conflict.
>
> I looks like Al has rewritten the branch you merged from his tree and
> caused various conflicts in my merge of the block tree today. I used
> Al's new versions of the conflicting files.

That's a bummer. I guess I'll have to rebase on top of the new one. Al,
is the new one going to be persistent?

--
Jens Axboe

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-20 03:46    [W:0.059 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site