linux-next: manual merge of the file-locks tree with the cel tree

linux-next: manual merge of the file-locks tree with the cel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1211 bytes --]

Hi all,

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

  fs/nfs/file.c

between commit:

  c045f1c40a48 ("nfs: don't allow reexport reclaims")

from the cel tree and commit:

  f7e33bdbd6d1 ("fs: remove mandatory file locking support")

from the file-locks 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/nfs/file.c
index 7411658f8b05,514be5d28d70..000000000000
--- a/fs/nfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
@@@ -806,13 -806,6 +806,9 @@@ int nfs_lock(struct file *filp, int cmd
  
  	nfs_inc_stats(inode, NFSIOS_VFSLOCK);
  
 +	if (fl->fl_flags & FL_RECLAIM)
 +		return -ENOGRACE;
 +
- 	/* No mandatory locks over NFS */
- 	if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
- 		goto out_err;
- 
  	if (NFS_SERVER(inode)->flags & NFS_MOUNT_LOCAL_FCNTL)
  		is_local = 1;
  

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

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the file-locks tree with the cel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1439 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 10:07:37 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the file-locks tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/nfs/file.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   c045f1c40a48 ("nfs: don't allow reexport reclaims")
> 
> from the cel tree and commit:
> 
>   f7e33bdbd6d1 ("fs: remove mandatory file locking support")
> 
> from the file-locks 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.
> 
> diff --cc fs/nfs/file.c
> index 7411658f8b05,514be5d28d70..000000000000
> --- a/fs/nfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
> @@@ -806,13 -806,6 +806,9 @@@ int nfs_lock(struct file *filp, int cmd
>   
>   	nfs_inc_stats(inode, NFSIOS_VFSLOCK);
>   
>  +	if (fl->fl_flags & FL_RECLAIM)
>  +		return -ENOGRACE;
>  +
> - 	/* No mandatory locks over NFS */
> - 	if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
> - 		goto out_err;
> - 
>   	if (NFS_SERVER(inode)->flags & NFS_MOUNT_LOCAL_FCNTL)
>   		is_local = 1;
>   

This is now a conflict between the cel tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

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