linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm-stable tree with the cifs 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 20:58:03 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Steve French <stfrench@...rosoft.com>,
        "Vishal Moola (Oracle)" <vishal.moola@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm-stable tree with the cifs tree

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 07:01:57PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
> 
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 13:58:29 +0000 Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 03:29:33PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the mm-stable tree got a conflict in:
> > > 
> > >   fs/cifs/file.c
> > > 
> > > between commit:
> > > 
> > >   c8859bc0c129 ("cifs: Remove unused code")
> > > 
> > > from the cifs tree and commits:
> > > 
> > >   4cda80f3a7a5 ("cifs: convert wdata_alloc_and_fillpages() to use filemap_get_folios_tag()")
> > >   d585bdbeb79a ("fs: convert writepage_t callback to pass a folio")
> > > 
> > > from the mm-stable tree.
> > > 
> > > This is a real mess :-(  
> > 
> > Doesn't look too bad to me.  Dave's commit is just removing the
> > functions, so it doesn't matter how they're being changed.
> 
> The problem I see is that an earlier commit in the cifs tree moves the
> use of find_get_pages_range_tag() to another function and 4cda80f3a7a5
> then removes find_get_pages_range_tag().

Ah.  Just removing all traces of it should be fine.  As long as there
are no remaining callers of find_get_pages_range_tag() after the merge,
it's good from my point of view.