From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752180AbdIKB3R (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Sep 2017 21:29:17 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:59331 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751894AbdIKB3P (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Sep 2017 21:29:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 11:29:13 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Benjamin LaHaise , Al Viro Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Deepa Dinamani Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the aio tree with the vfs tree Message-ID: <20170911112913.4b24f40f@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Benjamin, Today's linux-next merge of the aio tree got a conflict in: fs/aio.c between commit: 32ec9f249d65 ("io_getevents: Use timespec64 to represent timeouts") from the vfs tree and commit: eb5263749f68 ("aio: handle integer overflow in io_getevents() timespec usage") from the aio tree. I fixed it up (I just dropped the change in the latter commit) 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