From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the vfs tree Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 21:00:18 -0700 Message-ID: <54C70D52.6030208@kernel.dk> References: <20150127145754.03e711a3@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.220.48]:35806 "EHLO mail-pa0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751236AbbA0EAV (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jan 2015 23:00:21 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id ey11so15782699pad.7 for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:00:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20150127145754.03e711a3@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell , Al Viro Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Ming Lei On 01/26/2015 08:57 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Jens, > > Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in > drivers/block/loop.c between commit c2ca80413553 ("loop: convert to > vfs_iter_read/write") from the vfs tree and commit b5dd2f6047ca > ("block: loop: improve performance via blk-mq") and several others from > the block tree. > > I have no idea how fixed it up so I just used the version of the file > from the block tree (its been there a while). Please have a chat and > figure out how to combine these two large changes. Why isn't the loop patch in the block tree? That'd avoid such incidents. We could add a dependency for the required VFS patch. -- Jens Axboe