linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the libata tree with the block 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20161108165854.0872cd8b@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 8 Nov 2016 16:58:54 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Adam Manzanares <adam.manzanares@...t.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the libata tree with the block tree

Hi Tejun,

Today's linux-next merge of the libata tree got a conflict in:

  block/blk-core.c

between commits:

  e806402130c9 ("block: split out request-only flags into a new namespace")
  ef295ecf090d ("block: better op and flags encoding")

from the block tree and commit:

  5dc8b362a237 ("block: Add iocontext priority to request")

from the libata tree.

I fixed it up (see 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@@ -1152,11 -1153,11 +1152,12 @@@ static struct request *__get_request(st

        blk_rq_init(q, rq);
        blk_rq_set_rl(rq, rl);
+       blk_rq_set_prio(rq, ioc);
 -      req_set_op_attrs(rq, op, op_flags | REQ_ALLOCED);
 +      rq->cmd_flags = op;
 +      rq->rq_flags = rq_flags;

        /* init elvpriv */
 -      if (op_flags & REQ_ELVPRIV) {
 +      if (rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV) {
                if (unlikely(et->icq_cache && !icq)) {
                        if (ioc)
                                icq = ioc_create_icq(ioc, q, gfp_mask);