[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220301182958.7897ce30@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 18:29:58 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc: broonie@...nel.org,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@...dia.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
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 scsi-mkp tree with the block
tree
Hi all,
On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 22:06:22 +0000 broonie@...nel.org wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi-mkp tree got a conflict in:
>
> block/blk-lib.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 0a3140ea0fae3 ("block: pass a block_device and opf to blk_next_bio")
>
> from the block tree and commit:
>
> 2988062985d59 ("scsi: block: Remove REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME support")
>
> from the scsi-mkp tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) 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.
>
> diff --cc block/blk-lib.c
> index fc6ea52e74824,bf5254ccdb5f8..0000000000000
> --- a/block/blk-lib.c
> +++ b/block/blk-lib.c
>
> (took the deletion of _WRITE_SAME from scsi-mkp)
This is now a conflict between the scsi tree and the block tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists