From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the overlayfs tree Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 09:20:49 +1000 Message-ID: <20160511092049.4d61264d@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:50914 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751406AbcEJXUw (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 May 2016 19:20:52 -0400 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Al Viro , Miklos Szeredi Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Al, Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in: fs/overlayfs/super.c between commit: 420598d5bf9c ("ovl: ignore permissions on underlying lookup") from the overlayfs tree and commit: b9e1d435fdf4 ("ovl_lookup_real(): use lookup_one_len_unlocked()") from the vfs tree. I fixed it up (I abitrarily chose the overlayfs version (using lookup_hash() instead of lookup_one_len_unlocked())) 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. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell