linux-next: manual merge of the nvdimm tree with the block tree

linux-next: manual merge of the nvdimm tree with the block tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Dan,

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

  drivers/block/brd.c

between commit:

  f09a06a193d9 ("brd: remove discard support")

from the block tree and commit:

  1647b9b959c7 ("brd: add dax_operations support")

from the nvdimm tree.

Dan, thanks for the example merge, but I am not sure you did it quite
right. I removed the first three '-' lines below, you did not.

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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/block/brd.c
index 4ec84d504780,bfa4ed2c75ef..000000000000
--- a/drivers/block/brd.c
+++ b/drivers/block/brd.c
@@@ -415,9 -478,11 +429,6 @@@ static struct brd_device *brd_alloc(in
  	 *  is harmless)
  	 */
  	blk_queue_physical_block_size(brd->brd_queue, PAGE_SIZE);
- #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM_DAX
- 	queue_flag_set_unlocked(QUEUE_FLAG_DAX, brd->brd_queue);
- #endif
 -
 -	brd->brd_queue->limits.discard_granularity = PAGE_SIZE;
 -	blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(brd->brd_queue, UINT_MAX);
 -	brd->brd_queue->limits.discard_zeroes_data = 1;
 -	queue_flag_set_unlocked(QUEUE_FLAG_DISCARD, brd->brd_queue);
  	disk = brd->brd_disk = alloc_disk(max_part);
  	if (!disk)
  		goto out_free_queue;

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nvdimm tree with the block tree

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 07:18:31PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the nvdimm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/nvdimm/blk.c
> 
> between commits:
> 
>   322cbb50de71 ("block: remove genhd.h")
>   20072ec82864 ("nvdimm-blk: use bvec_kmap_local in nd_blk_rw_integrity")
> 
> from the block tree and commit:
> 
>   f8669f1d6a86 ("nvdimm/blk: Delete the block-aperture window driver")
> 
> from the nvdimm tree.

Yeah, the conflict resolution looks obviously correct :)

Thanks!

linux-next: manual merge of the nvdimm tree with the block tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 794 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  drivers/nvdimm/blk.c

between commits:

  322cbb50de71 ("block: remove genhd.h")
  20072ec82864 ("nvdimm-blk: use bvec_kmap_local in nd_blk_rw_integrity")

from the block tree and commit:

  f8669f1d6a86 ("nvdimm/blk: Delete the block-aperture window driver")

from the nvdimm tree.

I fixed it up (I removed the file) 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

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the nvdimm tree with the block tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Dan,

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

  fs/dax.c

between commit:

  ee472d835c26 ("block: add a flags argument to (__)blkdev_issue_zeroout")

from the block tree and commit:

  52d52d6f1178 ("filesystem-dax: convert to dax_direct_access()")

from the nvdimm 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc fs/dax.c
index 6433650be833,5b7ee1bc74d0..000000000000
--- a/fs/dax.c
+++ b/fs/dax.c
@@@ -979,24 -956,36 +965,36 @@@ static bool dax_range_is_aligned(struc
  	return true;
  }
  
- int __dax_zero_page_range(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector,
- 		unsigned int offset, unsigned int length)
+ int __dax_zero_page_range(struct block_device *bdev,
+ 		struct dax_device *dax_dev, sector_t sector,
+ 		unsigned int offset, unsigned int size)
  {
- 	struct blk_dax_ctl dax = {
- 		.sector		= sector,
- 		.size		= PAGE_SIZE,
- 	};
- 
- 	if (dax_range_is_aligned(bdev, offset, length)) {
- 		sector_t start_sector = dax.sector + (offset >> 9);
+ 	if (dax_range_is_aligned(bdev, offset, size)) {
+ 		sector_t start_sector = sector + (offset >> 9);
  
  		return blkdev_issue_zeroout(bdev, start_sector,
- 				length >> 9, GFP_NOFS, 0);
 -				size >> 9, GFP_NOFS, true);
++				size >> 9, GFP_NOFS, 0);
  	} else {
- 		if (dax_map_atomic(bdev, &dax) < 0)
- 			return PTR_ERR(dax.addr);
- 		clear_pmem(dax.addr + offset, length);
- 		dax_unmap_atomic(bdev, &dax);
+ 		pgoff_t pgoff;
+ 		long rc, id;
+ 		void *kaddr;
+ 		pfn_t pfn;
+ 
+ 		rc = bdev_dax_pgoff(bdev, sector, size, &pgoff);
+ 		if (rc)
+ 			return rc;
+ 
+ 		id = dax_read_lock();
+ 		rc = dax_direct_access(dax_dev, pgoff, PHYS_PFN(size), &kaddr,
+ 				&pfn);
+ 		if (rc < 0) {
+ 			dax_read_unlock(id);
+ 			return rc;
+ 		}
+ 		memset(kaddr + offset, 0, size);
+ 		if (test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_WC, &bdev->bd_queue->queue_flags))
+ 			dax_flush(dax_dev, pgoff, kaddr + offset, size);
+ 		dax_read_unlock(id);
  	}
  	return 0;
  }

linux-next: manual merge of the nvdimm tree with the block tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Dan,

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

  drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c

between commit:

  0d52c756a665 ("block: convert to device_add_disk()")

from the block tree and commit:

  f02716db951c ("libnvdimm: use devm_add_action_or_reset()")

from the nvdimm 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.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c
index 066e07d9330f,b6fcb97a601c..000000000000
--- a/drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c
+++ b/drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c
@@@ -303,7 -286,11 +285,11 @@@ static int pmem_attach_disk(struct devi
  		return -ENOMEM;
  	nvdimm_badblocks_populate(to_nd_region(dev->parent), &pmem->bb, res);
  	disk->bb = &pmem->bb;
 -	add_disk(disk);
 +	device_add_disk(dev, disk);
+ 
+ 	if (devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, pmem_release_disk, disk))
+ 		return -ENOMEM;
+ 
  	revalidate_disk(disk);
  
  	return 0;