[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090609.144125.88495131.ryusuke@osrg.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:41:25 +0900 (JST)
From: Ryusuke Konishi <ryusuke@...g.net>
To: sfr@...b.auug.org.au, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk
Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the nilfs tree
Hi,
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 11:11:14 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Al,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflicts in
> fs/nilfs2/super.c between commits from the nilfs tree and similar commits
> from the vfs tree.
>
> The vfs and nilfs trees have different versions of the following patches:
>
> nilfs2: get rid of sget use for checking if current mount is present
> nilfs2: simplify remaining sget() use
> nilfs2: correct exclusion control in nilfs_remount function
>
> And the vfs tree has further commits that affect this files as well.
>
> For now, I have used the vfs tree version. Please sort this out.
I've confirmed that the patch series is applied to the vfs tree.
To avoid the conflict, I will remove them from my nilfs2 tree.
Thanks,
Ryusuke Konishi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists