From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753671Ab3KAUlS (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 16:41:18 -0400 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:38726 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751457Ab3KAUlR (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 16:41:17 -0400 Message-ID: <527411DD.7050008@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:41:01 -0500 From: Dave Kleikamp User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jens Axboe , Stephen Rothwell CC: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Zach Brown , Kent Overstreet Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the tree References: <20131101142026.10390b6e3f70de348770c137@canb.auug.org.au> <5273C473.5070803@kernel.dk> <20131102072252.88d2380fa392705b912dbfad@canb.auug.org.au> <52740EB1.2070901@kernel.dk> In-Reply-To: <52740EB1.2070901@kernel.dk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/01/2013 03:27 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/01/2013 02:22 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi Jens, >> >> On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 09:10:43 -0600 Jens Axboe wrote: >>> >>> On 10/31/2013 09:20 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>> >>>> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in >>>> drivers/block/loop.c between commit 2486740b52fd ("loop: use aio to >>>> perform io on the underlying file") from the aio-direct tree and commit >>>> ed2d2f9a8265 ("block: Abstract out bvec iterator") from the block tree. >>>> >>>> I fixed it up (I think - see below - I have also attached the final >>>> resulting file) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is >>>> required). >>>> >>> >>> What tree is this from? It'd be a lot more convenient to fold that loop >>> patch into my tree, especially since the block tree in linux-next failed >>> after this merge. >> >> I can only agree with you. It is from the aio-direct tree (probably >> misnamed by me) (git://github.com/kleikamp/linux-shaggy.git#for-next) run >> by Dave Kleikamp. > > Dave, input requested. > > In any case, I would suggest dropping the aio-direct tree instead of the > entire block tree for coverage purposes, if merge or build failures > happen because of it. I've had these patches in linux-next since August, and I'd really like to push them in the 3.13 merge window. Are there other problems besides this merge issue? I'll take a closer look at Stephen's merge patch and see if I find any other issues, but I really don't want to pull these patches out of linux-next now. Thanks, Dave