Re: linux-next: manual merge of the folio tree with the fscache tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 20:25:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the folio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   0c31679cf2c0 ("netfs: Add a netfs inode context")
> 
> from the fscache tree and commit:
> 
>   09f7fc259e5d ("fscache: Convert fscache_set_page_dirty() to fscache_dirty_folio()")
> 
> from the folio 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/9p/vfs_addr.c
> index ed06f3c34e98,76956c9d2af9..000000000000
> --- a/fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> @@@ -353,9 -370,9 +336,9 @@@ static bool v9fs_dirty_folio(struct add
>   #endif
>   
>   const struct address_space_operations v9fs_addr_operations = {
>  -	.readpage = v9fs_vfs_readpage,
>  -	.readahead = v9fs_vfs_readahead,
>  +	.readpage = netfs_readpage,
>  +	.readahead = netfs_readahead,
> - 	.set_page_dirty = v9fs_set_page_dirty,
> + 	.dirty_folio = v9fs_dirty_folio,
>   	.writepage = v9fs_vfs_writepage,
>   	.write_begin = v9fs_write_begin,
>   	.write_end = v9fs_write_end,

This is now a conflict between the fscache tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgpUYcETHjsmP.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature