From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drbd tree with the block trees Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 08:01:35 +0200 Message-ID: <4C107FBF.9050209@kernel.dk> References: <20100610135203.4649453a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 0122700014.0.fullrate.dk ([95.166.99.235]:49311 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752042Ab0FJGBg (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2010 02:01:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100610135203.4649453a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Philipp Reisner , drbd-dev@linbit.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2010-06-10 05:52, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the drbd tree got a conflicts in > fs/fs-writeback.c against the block tree. > > It looks like the block tree has moved under the drbd tree again. I used > the version of this file from the block tree for today. I'm starting to think that it would be a little easier if you did not pull the drbd tree, I really should be pulling that into my -next branch instead. -- Jens Axboe From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from soda.linbit (unknown [10.9.9.55]) by mail09.linbit.com (LINBIT Mail Daemon) with ESMTP id C87931087075 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 09:45:32 +0200 (CEST) Resent-Message-ID: <20100610074532.GB6098@soda.linbit> Message-ID: <4C107FBF.9050209@kernel.dk> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 08:01:35 +0200 From: Jens Axboe MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Rothwell References: <20100610135203.4649453a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20100610135203.4649453a.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Philipp Reisner , drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com Subject: Re: [Drbd-dev] linux-next: manual merge of the drbd tree with the block trees List-Id: Coordination of development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 2010-06-10 05:52, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the drbd tree got a conflicts in > fs/fs-writeback.c against the block tree. > > It looks like the block tree has moved under the drbd tree again. I used > the version of this file from the block tree for today. I'm starting to think that it would be a little easier if you did not pull the drbd tree, I really should be pulling that into my -next branch instead. -- Jens Axboe