From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752679AbeANWR3 (ORCPT + 1 other); Sun, 14 Jan 2018 17:17:29 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:33033 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751321AbeANWR1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jan 2018 17:17:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 09:17:25 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Jaegeuk Kim , Theodore Ts'o Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Eric Biggers , Chao Yu Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the f2fs tree with the fscrypt tree Message-ID: <20180115091725.07d517a1@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 Return-Path: Hi Jaegeuk, Today's linux-next merge of the f2fs tree got a conflict in: fs/f2fs/namei.c between commit: 393c038f5c55 ("f2fs: switch to fscrypt ->symlink() helper functions") from the fscrypt tree and commit: acbf054d537d ("f2fs: inject fault to kzalloc") from the f2fs tree. I fixed it up (I just dropped the change to this file from 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