linux-next.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree
@ 2023-09-14 23:14 Stephen Rothwell
  2023-09-14 23:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2023-09-14 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Sterba, Andrew Morton
  Cc: Christoph Hellwig, David Sterba, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Linux Next Mailing List, Qi Zheng

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 723 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  fs/btrfs/super.c

between commit:

  c0824542e4d1 ("fs: super: dynamically allocate the s_shrink")

from the mm tree and commit:

  2ebed4689ba2 ("btrfs: open block devices after superblock creation")

from the btrfs 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

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree
  2023-09-14 23:14 linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2023-09-14 23:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
  2023-09-15  2:17   ` Qi Zheng
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2023-09-14 23:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Sterba, Andrew Morton
  Cc: Christoph Hellwig, David Sterba, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Linux Next Mailing List, Qi Zheng

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1934 bytes --]

Hi all,

[Forgot the diff ...]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 09:14:21 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/btrfs/super.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   c0824542e4d1 ("fs: super: dynamically allocate the s_shrink")
> 
> from the mm tree and commit:
> 
>   2ebed4689ba2 ("btrfs: open block devices after superblock creation")
> 
> from the btrfs 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/btrfs/super.c
index 3b165d9967bb,3eff75e06a57..000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/super.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c
@@@ -1518,8 -1459,23 +1459,23 @@@ static struct dentry *btrfs_mount_root(
  		if ((flags ^ s->s_flags) & SB_RDONLY)
  			error = -EBUSY;
  	} else {
- 		snprintf(s->s_id, sizeof(s->s_id), "%pg", bdev);
+ 		struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices = fs_info->fs_devices;
+ 
+ 		mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex);
+ 		error = btrfs_open_devices(fs_devices, sb_open_mode(flags),
+ 					   fs_type);
+ 		mutex_unlock(&uuid_mutex);
+ 		if (error)
+ 			goto error_deactivate;
+ 
+ 		if (!(flags & SB_RDONLY) && fs_devices->rw_devices == 0) {
+ 			error = -EACCES;
+ 			goto error_deactivate;
+ 		}
+ 
+ 		snprintf(s->s_id, sizeof(s->s_id), "%pg",
+ 			 fs_devices->latest_dev->bdev);
 -		shrinker_debugfs_rename(&s->s_shrink, "sb-%s:%s", fs_type->name,
 +		shrinker_debugfs_rename(s->s_shrink, "sb-%s:%s", fs_type->name,
  					s->s_id);
  		btrfs_sb(s)->bdev_holder = fs_type;
  		error = btrfs_fill_super(s, fs_devices, data);

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree
  2023-09-14 23:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2023-09-15  2:17   ` Qi Zheng
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Qi Zheng @ 2023-09-15  2:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stephen Rothwell
  Cc: David Sterba, Andrew Morton, Christoph Hellwig, David Sterba,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List

Hi Stephen,

The diff looks good to me.

Thanks,
Qi

On 2023/9/15 07:47, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> [Forgot the diff ...]
> 
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 09:14:21 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:
>>
>>    fs/btrfs/super.c
>>
>> between commit:
>>
>>    c0824542e4d1 ("fs: super: dynamically allocate the s_shrink")
>>
>> from the mm tree and commit:
>>
>>    2ebed4689ba2 ("btrfs: open block devices after superblock creation")
>>
>> from the btrfs 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.
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree
@ 2023-09-26  0:17 Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2023-09-26  0:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Sterba, Andrew Morton
  Cc: Christoph Hellwig, David Sterba, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Linux Next Mailing List, Qi Zheng

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1823 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  fs/btrfs/super.c

between commit:

  a95330e8e416 ("fs: super: dynamically allocate the s_shrink")

from the mm tree and commit:

  dd99b78be273 ("btrfs: open block devices after superblock creation")

from the btrfs 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/btrfs/super.c
index b1798bed68f2,c41ed5a78ea4..000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/super.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c
@@@ -1518,10 -1457,24 +1457,24 @@@ static struct dentry *btrfs_mount_root(
  		if ((flags ^ s->s_flags) & SB_RDONLY)
  			error = -EBUSY;
  	} else {
- 		snprintf(s->s_id, sizeof(s->s_id), "%pg", bdev);
+ 		struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices = fs_info->fs_devices;
+ 
+ 		mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex);
+ 		error = btrfs_open_devices(fs_devices, sb_open_mode(flags), s);
+ 		mutex_unlock(&uuid_mutex);
+ 		if (error)
+ 			goto error_deactivate;
+ 
+ 		if (!(flags & SB_RDONLY) && fs_devices->rw_devices == 0) {
+ 			error = -EACCES;
+ 			goto error_deactivate;
+ 		}
+ 
+ 		snprintf(s->s_id, sizeof(s->s_id), "%pg",
+ 			 fs_devices->latest_dev->bdev);
 -		shrinker_debugfs_rename(&s->s_shrink, "sb-%s:%s", fs_type->name,
 +		shrinker_debugfs_rename(s->s_shrink, "sb-%s:%s", fs_type->name,
  					s->s_id);
- 		btrfs_sb(s)->bdev_holder = fs_type;
+ 		btrfs_sb(s)->bdev_holder = s;
  		error = btrfs_fill_super(s, fs_devices, data);
  	}
  	if (!error)

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree
  2023-06-04 23:08 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2023-06-27  0:45 ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2023-06-27  0:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: David Sterba, Christoph Hellwig, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Linux Next Mailing List

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1370 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 09:08:03 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/btrfs/file.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   39bf7bdb48fe ("backing_dev: remove current->backing_dev_info")
> 
> from the mm tree and commit:
> 
>   3564004ccddf ("btrfs: determine synchronous writers from bio or writeback control")
> 
> from the btrfs 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/btrfs/file.c
> index ecd43ab66fa6,f53b7b75092d..000000000000
> --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> @@@ -1683,9 -1682,7 +1679,6 @@@ ssize_t btrfs_do_write_iter(struct kioc
>   			num_written = num_sync;
>   	}
>   
> - 	if (sync)
> - 		atomic_dec(&inode->sync_writers);
> - 
>  -	current->backing_dev_info = NULL;
>   	return num_written;
>   }
>   

This is now a conflict between the mm-stable tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree
@ 2023-06-04 23:08 Stephen Rothwell
  2023-06-27  0:45 ` Stephen Rothwell
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2023-06-04 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Sterba, Andrew Morton
  Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1101 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  fs/btrfs/file.c

between commit:

  39bf7bdb48fe ("backing_dev: remove current->backing_dev_info")

from the mm tree and commit:

  3564004ccddf ("btrfs: determine synchronous writers from bio or writeback control")

from the btrfs 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/btrfs/file.c
index ecd43ab66fa6,f53b7b75092d..000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
@@@ -1683,9 -1682,7 +1679,6 @@@ ssize_t btrfs_do_write_iter(struct kioc
  			num_written = num_sync;
  	}
  
- 	if (sync)
- 		atomic_dec(&inode->sync_writers);
- 
 -	current->backing_dev_info = NULL;
  	return num_written;
  }
  

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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-09-26  0:17 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-09-14 23:14 linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the mm tree Stephen Rothwell
2023-09-14 23:47 ` Stephen Rothwell
2023-09-15  2:17   ` Qi Zheng
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-09-26  0:17 Stephen Rothwell
2023-06-04 23:08 Stephen Rothwell
2023-06-27  0:45 ` Stephen Rothwell

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).