linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the btrfs-fixes 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 3 May 2020 23:40:41 +0200
From:   David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Filipe Manana <fdmanana@...e.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the btrfs-fixes
 tree

On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 10:28:25AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   f135cea30de5 ("btrfs: fix partial loss of prealloc extent past i_size after fsync")
> 
> from the btrfs-fixes tree and commit:
> 
>   e94d318f12cd ("btrfs: fix partial loss of prealloc extent past i_size after fsync")

Conflicts in the above commit and "btrfs: force chunk allocation if our
global rsv is larger than metadata" should be gone now. Both patches
have been merged to master and fresh for-next branch pushed to k.org.