From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the workqueues tree with the gfs2 tree Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:53:28 +1100 Message-ID: <20101012135328.bd1e6caa.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Whitehouse List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org Hi Tejun, Today's linux-next merge of the workqueues tree got a conflict in fs/gfs2/main.c between commit 9fa0ea9f26f64fbfc3dfd51d1dc2c230b65ffb19 ("GFS2: Use new workqueue scheme") from the gfs2 tree and commit 6370a6ad3b53df90b4700977f7718118a2cd524a ("workqueue: add and use WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag") from the workqueues tree. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au diff --cc fs/gfs2/main.c index d7eb1e2,1c5f460..0000000 --- a/fs/gfs2/main.c +++ b/fs/gfs2/main.c @@@ -144,7 -140,7 +144,7 @@@ static int __init init_gfs2_fs(void error = -ENOMEM; gfs_recovery_wq = alloc_workqueue("gfs_recovery", - WQ_RESCUER | WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0); - WQ_NON_REENTRANT | WQ_MEM_RECLAIM, 0); ++ WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0); if (!gfs_recovery_wq) goto fail_wq;