From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the ext4 tree Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 15:35:24 +1000 Message-ID: <20160701153524.16bc4757@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:41433 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751912AbcGAFf0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 01:35:26 -0400 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton , Theodore Ts'o Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara , Fabian Frederick , Christoph Hellwig , Lukas Czerner Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: fs/ext4/fsync.c between commit: 78d962510796 ("ext4: respect the nobarrier mount option in nojournal mode") from the ext4 tree and commit: 045d9e206ac0 ("fs/ext4/fsync.c: generic_file_fsync call based on barrier flag") from the akpm-current tree. I fixed it up (I used the ext4 tree version) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell