From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the osd tree with the scsi tree Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:07:14 +0200 Message-ID: <4B127202.1010900@panasas.com> References: <20091127143229.108298c6.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4B123A82.10104@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B123A82.10104@panasas.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley , open-osd Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On 11/29/2009 11:10 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 11/27/2009 05:32 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi Boaz, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the osd tree got a conflict in >> drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c between commit >> f89b9ee4a722721ed205b8c29555ac75fbe8c2cc ("[SCSI] osduld: Use >> device->release instead of internal kref") from the scsi tree and commit >> 9b579fe8588b861dcf0c9b620757729643db4557 ("osduld: Use device->release >> instead of internal kref") from the osd tree. >> >> These are slightly different versions of the same patch ... >> >> And commit 01e4c32c668251e74eb179ee1207c075466c4ef8 ("osduld: No need to >> use dev_set_drvdata on embedded devices") from the osd also contributes >> to the conflict. >> > > James has squashed these two patches together. Which do belong together > I should say. In my tree they are separate. I will change my tree to > match James's. > > Thanks James, I prefer it much better this way. > James hi. In your merge of the patch: [SCSI] osduld: Use device->release instead of internal kref at: [jejb: fold in use of container_of] You have made a mistake, which renders the driver unusable. At osd_remove() you changed the use of dev_get_drvdata to an, container_of() but it is the *wrong* dev at this point this dev here is the grand-parent of the embedded dev in question. Also at the next patch: [SCSI] libosd: osd_dev_info: Unique Identification of an OSD device a new use of dev_get_drvdata() is not converted to a container_of(), which by now will return NULL. Should I repost the correct two patches (my preference)? should I send in a fix to current scsi-misc tree? or should I send two SQUASH-ME patches to the two bad commits in your tree? How do you want to proceed? >> I fixed it up (the obvious way) and can carry the fix for a while. > Stephan, I have not yet fixed up the conflict in -next, please carry that fix you have for a little while, until we resolve it. > Thanks > Boaz Boaz