[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 10:00:32 +0800
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs tree
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/logfs/dev_bdev.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 6b4fbde3b979 ("logfs: remove from tree")
>
> from the vfs tree and commitis:
>
> 3a83f4677539 ("block: bio: pass bvec table to bio_init()")
> 739a9975468c ("fs: logfs: convert to bio_add_page() in sync_request()")
> d4f98a89f9cd ("fs: logfs: use bio_add_page() in __bdev_writeseg()")
> c12484367865 ("fs: logfs: use bio_add_page() in do_erase()")
> 05aea81b4bc9 ("fs: logfs: remove unnecesary check")
>
> from the block tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I removed the file) 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.
Looks every time the logfs changes have been posted in fsdev mail list.
--
Ming Lei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists