xfs-masters
[Top] [All Lists]

[xfs-masters] Re: linux-next: vfs merge failure

To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [xfs-masters] Re: linux-next: vfs merge failure
From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 05:23:35 +0000
Cc: Dave Hansen <haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx>, David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20080326160651.7c1b10ae.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
References: <20080326160651.7c1b10ae.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Reply-to: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 04:06:51PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Al, Dave,
> 
> In merging your vfs tree today, I get a conflict between commit
> 9e57c9b50551a21e056fea654b3aac5db7c33ec9 ("[PATCH] r/o bind mounts:
> elevate write count for ioctls()") and commit
> c657925dc0057ed2ec0db845a1a4f56651adfe39 ("[XFS] The forward declarations
> for the xfs_ioctl() helpers and the") in the xfs tree.  Basically the
> whole xfs_ioctl function has been moved by the latter commit while Dave's
> patch modifies it slightly.
> 
> I have fixed it up for today and am not really sure what we can do about
> it (hopefully git-rerere will fix it for me from now on, so I can carry
> it, but it will conflict when merged into Linus' tree).

*shrug*

I'll probably cherry-pick XFS changeset in question, if it's self-contained
enough, and put it in front of ro-bind series.  Ought to resolve the
conflict and I have no hestitation about reordering/rebasing.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>