[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190712105656.04e8ed23@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 10:56:56 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Price <anprice@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gfs2 tree with the vfs tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:48:42 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the gfs2 tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/gfs2/super.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 000c8e591016 ("gfs2: Convert gfs2 to fs_context")
>
> from the vfs tree and commit:
>
> 5b3a9f348bc5 ("gfs2: kthread and remount improvements")
>
> from the gfs2 tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just used the vfs tree version since it removed some of
> the code modified by the latter) 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.
This is now a conflict between the vfs tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists