[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220118181734.GC13540@magnolia>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 10:17:34 -0800
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: David Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree
On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 09:30:41AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 983d8e60f508 ("xfs: map unwritten blocks in XFS_IOC_{ALLOC,FREE}SP just like fallocate")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 4d1b97f9ce7c ("xfs: kill the XFS_IOC_{ALLOC,FREE}SP* ioctls")
>
> from the xfs tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the latter removed the code modified by the former, so I
> did that) 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.
Ok, thanks! The resolution you picked (delete xfs_ioc_space regardless
of its contents) is exactly what I was expecting.
--D
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Powered by blists - more mailing lists