lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with Linus' and te ext4 trees
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 09:19:19PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:04:59AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in
> > fs/ext4/extents.c between rebased versions of commits from Linus' and the
> > ext4 trees and the same commits from the vfs tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I just used the version from Linus' and the ext4 trees)
> > and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
> >
> > Al, this is why I asked you about checking with Ted about his tree being
> > rebased after you merged it into yours ...
>
> Sorry, Al, I hadn't been aware you wanted to carrying some of these
> changes. I had mentioned that I was planning on carrying them in the
> ext4 tree and including them for 3.15 because some of them were fixing
> bugs that had been introduced in the merge window. Since no one
> objected, I thought everyone was on the same page about that plan.

*rechecks*
I have Cc'd you on this:

<quote>
Subject: Re: linus-next stats (Re: Linux 3.15-rc1 out, merge window closed)
Message-ID: <20140417203412.GB18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
[snip]
one non-trivial in ext4 that I've dealt with by merging a piece of ext4
branch up to the relevant point. As long as ext4.git#dev isn't rebased,
everything should remain fine, when/if it does I'll just redo that merge.
BTW, ext4 side of that thing is *still* not quite right - playing with
rlimit allows one to smuggle an unaligned write past that check...
</quote>

I'll rebase that thing...


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-22 04:01    [W:0.594 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site