[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpeguxmJvCV+PXr=wz5HXONKv4RDmZ1LpYNEqAtvw_smP5Ag@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 11:00:00 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the fuse tree
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 5:01 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/fuse/inode.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 1458e5e9f99a ("fuse: extract fuse_fill_super_common()")
>
> from the fuse tree and commit:
>
> 2ad9ab0f7429 ("vfs: Convert fuse to use the new mount API")
> 48ceb15f98c8 ("vfs: Move the subtype parameter into fuse")
And the latter is b0rked anyway.
Al, please drop these patches from the VFS queue, I'll take (and fix)
them through the fuse queue.
Thanks,
Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists