From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Mason Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip-core tree with Linus' tree Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:46:23 -0500 Message-ID: <1234140383.26563.0.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> References: <20090209113855.180c03cb.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rcsinet11.oracle.com ([148.87.113.123]:54174 "EHLO rgminet11.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753512AbZBIAqx (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Feb 2009 19:46:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090209113855.180c03cb.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 11:38 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip-core tree got a conflict in > fs/btrfs/locking.c between commit > b4ce94de9b4d64e8ab3cf155d13653c666e22b9b ("Btrfs: Change btree locking to > use explicit blocking points") from Linus' tree and commit > cf47b8f3d96b0b8b10b557444a28b3ca4024ff82 ("Btrfs: stop spinning on > mutex_trylock and let the adaptive code spin for us") from the tip-core > tree. > > Resolved as in tip/master by taking the version from Linus' tree. Sorry, I meant to ask Ingo to drop the patch I had sent along for the btrfs adaptive code. Using Linus' copy was the right answer, it replaces the patch I sent to Ingo. -chris