From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the cgroup tree with the block tree Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:17:42 -0800 Message-ID: <20120307191742.GB30676@google.com> References: <20120307160516.53086e588a8246edd87c41fc@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-tul01m020-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:44964 "EHLO mail-tul01m020-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759799Ab2CGTRr (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:17:47 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120307160516.53086e588a8246edd87c41fc@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Li Zefan , Jens Axboe On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 04:05:16PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Tejun, > > Today's linux-next merge of the cgroup tree got a conflict in > block/blk-cgroup.c between commit 7ee9c5620504 ("blkcg: let blkio_group > point to blkio_cgroup directly") from the block tree and commit > 761b3ef50e1c ("cgroup: remove cgroup_subsys argument from callbacks") > from the cgroup tree. > > I fixed it up (I hope - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. Yeap, looks correct to me. Thank you very much. -- tejun