All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jann Horn <jann@thejh.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 11:35:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160721013558.GO16044@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160721110756.7a905ee8@canb.auug.org.au>

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:07:56AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the xfs tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   3e0a39654645 ("xfs: fix type confusion in xfs_ioc_swapext")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   7f1b62457b58 ("xfs: fix type confusion in xfs_ioc_swapext")
> 
> from the xfs tree.
> 
> These are not quite the same patch :-(

Yeah, I added comments to explain the code, because it's not obvious
why the check was added, and I couldn't find any other examples of
such checks in fs/. So, in five years time when I look at that code
again, the comment will remind me why it's a bad idea to remove what
appears to be an unnecesary check...

> I fixed it up (I used the version in the xfs tree) 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.

Yup, I planned to let Linus know. Patches in private emails that
aren't tagged [PATCH] in the subject line don't get the immediate
attention of my mail filters, so I didn't see it immediately.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Jann Horn <jann@thejh.net>,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 11:35:58 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160721013558.GO16044@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160721110756.7a905ee8@canb.auug.org.au>

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:07:56AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the xfs tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   3e0a39654645 ("xfs: fix type confusion in xfs_ioc_swapext")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   7f1b62457b58 ("xfs: fix type confusion in xfs_ioc_swapext")
> 
> from the xfs tree.
> 
> These are not quite the same patch :-(

Yeah, I added comments to explain the code, because it's not obvious
why the check was added, and I couldn't find any other examples of
such checks in fs/. So, in five years time when I look at that code
again, the comment will remind me why it's a bad idea to remove what
appears to be an unnecesary check...

> I fixed it up (I used the version in the xfs tree) 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.

Yup, I planned to let Linus know. Patches in private emails that
aren't tagged [PATCH] in the subject line don't get the immediate
attention of my mail filters, so I didn't see it immediately.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-21  1:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-21  1:07 linux-next: manual merge of the xfs tree with Linus' tree Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-21  1:07 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-07-21  1:35 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2016-07-21  1:35   ` Dave Chinner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-10-31  0:41 Stephen Rothwell
2022-03-30 22:00 Stephen Rothwell
2022-01-17 22:30 Stephen Rothwell
2022-01-18 18:17 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-07-16 23:36 Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-31  0:22 Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-31  1:05 ` Dave Chinner
2018-06-05  0:34 Stephen Rothwell
2018-06-05  0:38 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-06-05  0:59 ` Dave Chinner
2018-06-05  1:13   ` Andreas Grünbacher
2018-06-05  1:25   ` Stephen Rothwell
2017-12-21 22:50 Stephen Rothwell
2017-12-21 23:01 ` Darrick J. Wong
2015-04-20  2:24 Stephen Rothwell
2015-04-20  2:24 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-01-03  1:06 Stephen Rothwell
2012-01-03  1:34 ` Dave Chinner
2011-09-15  2:30 Stephen Rothwell
2011-09-15 11:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-03-28  1:21 Stephen Rothwell
2009-08-18  0:12 Stephen Rothwell
2009-08-18  6:49 ` Felix Blyakher
2009-08-18  7:17   ` Stephen Rothwell

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=20160721013558.GO16044@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=jann@thejh.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.