linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs 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: <54C70D52.6030208@kernel.dk>
Date:	Mon, 26 Jan 2015 21:00:18 -0700
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
CC:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs tree

On 01/26/2015 08:57 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in
> drivers/block/loop.c between commit c2ca80413553 ("loop: convert to
> vfs_iter_read/write") from the vfs tree and commit b5dd2f6047ca
> ("block: loop: improve performance via blk-mq") and several others from
> the block tree.
>
> I have no idea how fixed it up so I just used the version of the file
> from the block tree (its been there a while).  Please have a chat and
> figure out how to combine these two large changes.

Why isn't the loop patch in the block tree? That'd avoid such incidents. 
We could add a dependency for the required VFS patch.


-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/