[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20131102072252.88d2380fa392705b912dbfad@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 07:22:52 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>,
Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>,
Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the tree
Hi Jens,
On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 09:10:43 -0600 Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>
> On 10/31/2013 09:20 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/block/loop.c between commit 2486740b52fd ("loop: use aio to
> > perform io on the underlying file") from the aio-direct tree and commit
> > ed2d2f9a8265 ("block: Abstract out bvec iterator") from the block tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I think - see below - I have also attached the final
> > resulting file) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is
> > required).
> >
>
> What tree is this from? It'd be a lot more convenient to fold that loop
> patch into my tree, especially since the block tree in linux-next failed
> after this merge.
I can only agree with you. It is from the aio-direct tree (probably
misnamed by me) (git://github.com/kleikamp/linux-shaggy.git#for-next) run
by Dave Kleikamp.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists