From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141BCC43603 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 05:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC5BF206EF for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 05:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="MSLKMuHu" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727174AbfLTFfB (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Dec 2019 00:35:01 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-f66.google.com ([209.85.166.66]:41564 "EHLO mail-io1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725781AbfLTFfB (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Dec 2019 00:35:01 -0500 Received: by mail-io1-f66.google.com with SMTP id c16so4630957ioo.8 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 21:35:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bJH9ngAKUt2zZBSAR+jdXkYppUB/dH1U+o3RlVCLv24=; b=MSLKMuHu9QZksGDMR6iUQ/crRkDEPYDqT4JZL7mzTHB6il8vBxzjQRibZnMfCeT2le mQida8F+9unRkoc1GnDv4mI9YgnWe4GyoeK7jjYVPdrZtNVSRl4AM8yGg+29WN1dGwug VTLCzs7L6SS5hPiivZvxr3YennyaDl2vj7jCX03XRxW5Loh1HeH/mGVl2dLvu0gSyhhu DpRPoS7E4pPCerJDnXIK+sTEnhPo4HYvBa9x3kXqYm65XfftWoxUyOFeUfOj73fZam6G /6MvRT0FkORkkE2gjxcJxGRZm0wdNDGFGf3rTGB97TetN1i9BDOJK79BjRuNDdLb5dzY Fz9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bJH9ngAKUt2zZBSAR+jdXkYppUB/dH1U+o3RlVCLv24=; b=NPvafD2mVcoEogsHbphWKJ8ns6flOdl4iRbY6L9SwxR+fEOpNqEGM6CMRqMa2MPD3N e3NaTcedejbGVWtCU6/0X8cvKfFC4/L4SYFCsTZLwUGneJgPPf6jC4jAo8HVfDvn4VJh /FftXWkMueFuQSwLvOxXtBouHu/JktisnVp80iifmdLhdz61bGJi+lMDtAP76rcgHjfa XK4hDL71nOwLHhsRBzHJ2EfRRPavRB75qNjjfa3IZ6ul6Y4WkWDAxgrnnLcGPqpZZ2GG BGOnAjwquSBDQiNXT0frmFJq7QIHmDgEWTJ4lkzZfwgGXMSn4m05TJ5sN7gVrD35nfU5 t31g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUE4GAk14P0kgghzlEiK5lKHpdJlnvBWMh5I6vubdzP5Hn6MmoJ EnzhT36BG1TBMLrkFshs5j2eWw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz3mkdhGZsgbEu11Mzt0Nz4pjnOdDnxa00QXAm4U97lfdYncbGpna1SDIs8u3ttfnE7oQWhUQ== X-Received: by 2002:a6b:c8c8:: with SMTP id y191mr9069907iof.104.1576820100628; Thu, 19 Dec 2019 21:35:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.159] ([65.144.74.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h3sm3880783ilh.6.2019.12.19.21.34.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Dec 2019 21:35:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs tree To: Stephen Rothwell , Al Viro Cc: Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Aleksa Sarai References: <20191220123614.5f11d2e3@canb.auug.org.au> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 22:34:59 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191220123614.5f11d2e3@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/19/19 6:36 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in: > > fs/open.c > > between commit: > > 0a51692d49ec ("open: introduce openat2(2) syscall") > > from the vfs tree and commit: > > 252270311374 ("fs: make build_open_flags() available internally") > > from the block tree. > > I fixed it up (see at end, plus the merge fix patch 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. Thanks Stephen, I may just pull in the vfs tree to avoid this conflict. -- Jens Axboe