linux-kernel - Re: [xfs-masters] linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110328104753.GA27327@lst.de>
Date:	Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:47:53 +0200
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	David Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, xfs-masters@....sgi.com,
	Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with
	Linus' tree

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 12:21:48PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the xfs tree got a conflict in
> fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_buf.c between commit 7eaceaccab5f ("block: remove
> per-queue plugging") from Linus' tree and commit 0e6e847ffe37 ("xfs: stop
> using the page cache to back the buffer cache") from the xfs tree.
> 
> I assume that these changes (on both sides) were discussed somewhere, but
> maybe not clearly enough?
> 
> I have no idea how to fix this, so I tried to just use the xfs tree
> version for today.  That failed like this:
> 
> fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_buf.c: In function 'xfs_buf_lock':
> fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_buf.c:923: error: implicit declaration of function 'blk_run_backing_dev'
> 
> So I used the xfs tree from next-20110325 for today.

What XFS does is to replace blk_run_address_space, which was a wrapper
around blk_run_backing_dev with a direct call to blk_run_backing_dev,
as there change means we don't have the address_space around anymore.

Jens' tree removes both these functions, and introduces blk_flush_plug
as a sort-of replacement.  Sticking to the variant from Jens' tree / mainline
with blk_flush_plug is the correct thing here for this case.

Where there more conflicts than just this?
--
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/