linux-kernel - linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs-fixes tree with the origin 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <aNZ2-6TZzpXbS50a@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 12:20:27 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>,
	Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs-fixes tree with the origin tree

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs-fixes tree got a conflict in:

  fs/btrfs/zoned.c

between commit:

  53de7ee4e28f6 ("btrfs: zoned: don't fail mount needlessly due to too many active zones")

from the origin tree and commit:

  cc53bd2085c8f ("btrfs: add unlikely annotations to branches leading to EIO")

from the btrfs-fixes 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 fs/btrfs/zoned.c
index f426276e2b6bf,e3341a84f4ab3..0000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/zoned.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/zoned.c

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)