From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:42692 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725782AbfGMEHp (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Jul 2019 00:07:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 21:07:28 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] xfs: new features for 5.3 Message-ID: <20190713040728.GB5347@magnolia> References: <20190712180205.GA5347@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-fsdevel , linux-xfs , Dave Chinner , Linux List Kernel Mailing , Eric Sandeen , Christoph Hellwig On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 05:27:15PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 11:02 AM Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > The branch merges cleanly against this morning's HEAD and survived an > > overnight run of xfstests. The merge was completely straightforward, so > > please let me know if you run into anything weird. > > Hmm. I don't know what you merged against, but it got a (fairly > trivial) conflict for me due to > > 79d08f89bb1b ("block: fix .bi_size overflow") > > from the block merge (from Tuesday) touching a line next to one changed by > > a24737359667 ("xfs: simplify xfs_chain_bio") > > from this pull. > > So it wasn't an entirely clean merge for me. > > Was it a complex merge conflict? No. I'm just confused by the "merges > cleanly against this morning's HEAD", which makes me wonder what you > tried to merge against.. Doh, it turns out I was merging against the same HEAD as my last two pull requests because I forgot to re-pull. Sorry about that. It's been too long of a week. :/ --D > Linus