From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the nfsd tree with the nfs tree Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:08:52 -0400 Message-ID: <1249927732.21816.5.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> References: <20090810105851.80333493.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20090810160537.GD3401@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:10591 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751086AbZHJSKB (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:10:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090810160537.GD3401@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "J. Bruce Fields" Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, NeilBrown On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 12:05 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:58:51AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in > > net/sunrpc/cache.c between commit > > 173912a6add00f4715774dcecf9ee53274c5924c ("SUNRPC: Move procfs-specific > > stuff out of the generic sunrpc cache code") from the nfs tree and commit > > f866a8194f7cbabb9135b98b9ac7d26237b88367 ("sunrpc/cache: rename > > queue_loose to cache_dequeue") from the nfsd tree. > > OK, thanks. > > Looks like there may be some less trivial conflicts now, though. Trond, > maybe you could rebase the cache stuff against my latest for-2.6.32? I've merged your for-2.6.32 into a dedicated sunrpc_cache-for_next topic branch and pushed that out as part of the NFS client linux-next. -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com www.netapp.com