From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the fscrypt tree
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 19:55:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ca843f39-3fcd-1a03-34c9-7284f10fe262@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190116132522.1b756433@canb.auug.org.au>
On 1/15/19 7:25 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/ext4/readpage.c
>
> between commit:
>
> acc9eb0a6073 ("ext4: add fs-verity read support")
>
> from the fscrypt tree and commit:
>
> eb754eb2a953 ("block: allow bio_for_each_segment_all() to iterate over multi-page bvec")
>
> from the block tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below - the former moved the code modified by the
> latter) 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.
Ming, I'm pulling this, I thought we agreed none of these bullshit
renames? The fact that a patch looks like this:
- for_each_bvec(bv, (it)->bvecs, __cur_iter, __cur_iter) \
+ for_each_segment(bv, (it)->bvecs, __cur_iter, __cur_iter) \
is SUPER annoying and does NOTHING but to cause merge conflicts.
Resend it without that.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-16 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-16 2:25 linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the fscrypt tree Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-16 2:55 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2019-01-16 3:13 ` Ming Lei
2019-01-16 3:17 ` Jens Axboe
2019-01-16 7:39 ` Ming Lei
2019-01-16 14:27 ` Jens Axboe
2019-01-18 2:45 ` Ming Lei
2020-07-09 3:02 Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-23 1:03 ` Stephen Rothwell
2022-02-14 1:11 Stephen Rothwell
2022-02-14 7:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-02-14 19:26 ` Eric Biggers
2022-02-21 16:45 broonie
2022-02-21 16:47 broonie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ca843f39-3fcd-1a03-34c9-7284f10fe262@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).