From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm tree with the nfs tree Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:33:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20120731103336.GN612@suse.de> References: <20120731142441.0d01100f9d050ec6e479c923@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:41577 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753302Ab2GaKdk (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jul 2012 06:33:40 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120731142441.0d01100f9d050ec6e479c923@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Layton , Trond Myklebust On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 02:24:41PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in > net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c between commit 5cf02d09b50b ("nfs: skip commit in > releasepage if we're freeing memory for fs-related reasons") from the nfs > tree and commit "nfs: enable swap on NFS" from the akpm tree. > > Just context changes? I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry > the fix as necessary. Functionally it looks fine. As you say, it all looks like context changes. Arguably code like this current->flags &= ~PF_FSTRANS could use tsk_restore_flags instead() even though it should never be necessary as PF_FSTRANS would not be set on function entry. However, it would set up a depedency between the patch sets that is undesirable. If both sets get merged then it might make sense as a cleanup to use tsk_restore_flags() but not until then. Thanks Stephen. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs