Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the erofs tree

[Gao Xiang]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 03:11:07PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Gao,
> 
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2022 11:13:50 +0800 Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:24:15AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
> > > 
> > >   fs/erofs/fscache.c
> > > 
> > > between commits:
> > > 
> > >   89175ef1262d ("erofs: switch to prepare_ondemand_read() in fscache mode")
> > >   89175ef1262d ("erofs: switch to prepare_ondemand_read() in fscache mode")
> > > 
> > > from the erofs tree and commit:
> > > 
> > >   89175ef1262d ("erofs: switch to prepare_ondemand_read() in fscache mode")
> > > 
> > > from the vfs tree.  
> > 
> > Is the commit from the vfs tree correct?
> > 
> > The conflict fix looks good to me (we tend to enable large folios in the
> > next cycle.)
> 
> The commits should be
> 
>   89175ef1262d ("erofs: switch to prepare_ondemand_read() in fscache mode")
>   a21274e993a6 ("erofs: support large folios for fscache mode")
> 
> from the erofs tree and
> 
>   de4eda9de2d9 ("use less confusing names for iov_iter direction initializers")
> 
> from the vfs tree.
> 
> Cut and paste weirdness caught me again :-(

Thanks for the confirmation!

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell