public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the fs-current tree
@ 2024-06-28 14:05 Mark Brown
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2024-06-28 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Sterba
  Cc: David Sterba, Filipe Manana, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Linux Next Mailing List

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 965 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:

  fs/btrfs/tree-log.c

between commit:

  d1825752e3074 ("btrfs: use NOFS context when getting inodes during logging and log replay")

from the fs-current tree and commits:

  2eb717ce25c03 ("btrfs: use NOFS context when getting inodes during logging and log replay")
  8cfe0e0697c2d ("btrfs: remove super block argument from btrfs_iget()")

from the btrfs tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

diff --cc fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
index 0bce1d45e2526,f0cf8ce26f010..0000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-log.c

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the fs-current tree
@ 2024-06-28 13:59 Mark Brown
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2024-06-28 13:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Sterba
  Cc: David Sterba, Filipe Manana, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
	Linux Next Mailing List

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 856 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:

  fs/btrfs/qgroup.c

between commit:

  a7e4c6a3031c7 ("btrfs: qgroup: fix quota root leak after quota disable failure")

from the fs-current tree and commit:

  27a6520fbc259 ("btrfs: do not BUG_ON() when freeing tree block after error")

from the btrfs tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

diff --cc fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
index bf0f81d59b6bc,3cf9724eb188c..0000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-06-28 14:05 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-06-28 14:05 linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the fs-current tree Mark Brown
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-06-28 13:59 Mark Brown

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox