linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 676 bytes --]

Hi Artem,

Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got conflicts in
fs/ubifs/budget.c, fs/ubifs/debug.c, fs/ubifs/dir.c, fs/ubifs/file.c,
fs/ubifs/io.c, fs/ubifs/journal.c, fs/ubifs/shrinker.c, fs/ubifs/tnc.c
and fs/ubifs/xattr.c between commit
1e51764a3c2ac05a23a22b2a95ddee4d9bffb16d ("UBIFS: add new flash file
system") from Linus' tree and various commits from the ubifs tree.

This is due to a different thing being sent to Linus to what is in the
-next tree.

I used the versions from the ubifs tree for now, please clean this up for
tomorrow.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

[Artem Bityutskiy]

Hi Stephen

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got conflicts in
> fs/ubifs/budget.c, fs/ubifs/debug.c, fs/ubifs/dir.c, fs/ubifs/file.c,
> fs/ubifs/io.c, fs/ubifs/journal.c, fs/ubifs/shrinker.c, fs/ubifs/tnc.c
> and fs/ubifs/xattr.c between commit
> 1e51764a3c2ac05a23a22b2a95ddee4d9bffb16d ("UBIFS: add new flash file
> system") from Linus' tree and various commits from the ubifs tree.

Yes, right. I guess I should have informed you about this, apologies.

UBIFS is rather non-typical things for -next I guess.

No one is interested in UBIFS history _before_ it got into mainline,
which is about several hundred commits. Thus, we folded these all
into few huge large commits, in order not to garbage the mainline
tree.

I have amended the 'for_andrew' branch of ubifs-2.6.git, and now it
has the same commits as in Linus's tree. But it is still based on
2.6.26 release.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 598 bytes --]

Hi Artem,

Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got conflicts in
Documentation/filesystems/ubifs.txt, fs/ubifs/budget.c,
fs/ubifs/commit.c, fs/ubifs/debug.c, fs/ubifs/dir.c, fs/ubifs/file.c,
fs/ubifs/io.c, fs/ubifs/journal.c, fs/ubifs/log.c, fs/ubifs/misc.h,
fs/ubifs/orphan.c, fs/ubifs/super.c and fs/ubifs/ubifs.h against Linus'
tree.

This has happened because of a partial merge of this tree into Linus'
tree.  I just took the ubifs tree's version of all those files.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

[Artem Bityutskiy]

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got conflicts in
> Documentation/filesystems/ubifs.txt, fs/ubifs/budget.c,
> fs/ubifs/commit.c, fs/ubifs/debug.c, fs/ubifs/dir.c, fs/ubifs/file.c,
> fs/ubifs/io.c, fs/ubifs/journal.c, fs/ubifs/log.c, fs/ubifs/misc.h,
> fs/ubifs/orphan.c, fs/ubifs/super.c and fs/ubifs/ubifs.h against Linus'
> tree.
> 
> This has happened because of a partial merge of this tree into Linus'
> tree.  I just took the ubifs tree's version of all those files.

Oh. This is because I still have my tree based on 2.6.26, + the same
patches which are in Linus's tree, + more. I thought you scrips would
somehow magically deal with this.

I was reluctant to switch to linus tree because the tg3 driver does
not compile. I will try again, sorry for these troubles.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

[Adrian Bunk]

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got conflicts in
>> Documentation/filesystems/ubifs.txt, fs/ubifs/budget.c,
>> fs/ubifs/commit.c, fs/ubifs/debug.c, fs/ubifs/dir.c, fs/ubifs/file.c,
>> fs/ubifs/io.c, fs/ubifs/journal.c, fs/ubifs/log.c, fs/ubifs/misc.h,
>> fs/ubifs/orphan.c, fs/ubifs/super.c and fs/ubifs/ubifs.h against Linus'
>> tree.
>>
>> This has happened because of a partial merge of this tree into Linus'
>> tree.  I just took the ubifs tree's version of all those files.
>
> Oh. This is because I still have my tree based on 2.6.26, + the same
> patches which are in Linus's tree, + more. I thought you scrips would
> somehow magically deal with this.
>
> I was reluctant to switch to linus tree because the tg3 driver does
> not compile. I will try again, sorry for these troubles.

Are you referring to the firmware compile glitch (that was fixed Monday 
last week) or what compile error do you get?

> Best Regards,
> Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

[Artem Bityutskiy]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 10:42:20AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got conflicts in
>>> Documentation/filesystems/ubifs.txt, fs/ubifs/budget.c,
>>> fs/ubifs/commit.c, fs/ubifs/debug.c, fs/ubifs/dir.c, fs/ubifs/file.c,
>>> fs/ubifs/io.c, fs/ubifs/journal.c, fs/ubifs/log.c, fs/ubifs/misc.h,
>>> fs/ubifs/orphan.c, fs/ubifs/super.c and fs/ubifs/ubifs.h against Linus'
>>> tree.
>>>
>>> This has happened because of a partial merge of this tree into Linus'
>>> tree.  I just took the ubifs tree's version of all those files.
>> Oh. This is because I still have my tree based on 2.6.26, + the same
>> patches which are in Linus's tree, + more. I thought you scrips would
>> somehow magically deal with this.
>>
>> I was reluctant to switch to linus tree because the tg3 driver does
>> not compile. I will try again, sorry for these troubles.
> 
> Are you referring to the firmware compile glitch (that was fixed Monday 
> last week) or what compile error do you get?

Not entirely sure. Anyway, it compiles fine now. I'll fix my trees.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the ubifs tree

[Artem Bityutskiy]

Stephen,

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the ubifs tree got conflicts in
> Documentation/filesystems/ubifs.txt, fs/ubifs/budget.c,
> fs/ubifs/commit.c, fs/ubifs/debug.c, fs/ubifs/dir.c, fs/ubifs/file.c,
> fs/ubifs/io.c, fs/ubifs/journal.c, fs/ubifs/log.c, fs/ubifs/misc.h,
> fs/ubifs/orphan.c, fs/ubifs/super.c and fs/ubifs/ubifs.h against Linus'
> tree.
> 
> This has happened because of a partial merge of this tree into Linus'
> tree.  I just took the ubifs tree's version of all those files.

I've re-based both UBI and UBIFS trees against todays Linus' tree,
i.e. commit 338b9bb3adac0d2c5a1e180491d9b001d624c402

I compile-tested that - looks fine. Internally I still keep working
with 2.6.26 release for several reasons, but UBI/UBIFS are so isolated
that I thing the re-based stuff is fine. At lease this has always
be the case in the past. Thanks.

Hopefully this time -next merge will go smoothly.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)