lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the f2fs tree
Hi all,

On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:12:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:43:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got conflicts in:
> >
> > fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
> > fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > fs/f2fs/super.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 5c0602188dc7 ("f2fs: fix kbytes written stat for multi-device case")
> >
> > from the f2fs tree and commits:
> >
> > 8446fe9255be ("block: switch partition lookup to use struct block_device")
> > 9499ffc75217 ("f2fs: remove a few bd_part checks")
> >
> > from the block tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I think, see below, fs/f2fs/f2fs.h and fs/f2fs/super.c
> > used the versions from the f2fs tree) 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/f2fs/checkpoint.c
> > index 14ba1519639e,54a1905af052..000000000000
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
> > @@@ -1385,27 -1385,6 +1385,26 @@@ static void commit_checkpoint(struct f2
> > f2fs_submit_merged_write(sbi, META_FLUSH);
> > }
> >
> > +static inline u64 get_sectors_written(struct block_device *bdev)
> > +{
> > - return bdev->bd_part ?
> > - (u64)part_stat_read(bdev->bd_part, sectors[STAT_WRITE]) : 0;
> > ++ return (u64)part_stat_read(bdev, sectors[STAT_WRITE]) : 0;
> ^^^^
> With this removed.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +u64 f2fs_get_sectors_written(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
> > +{
> > + if (f2fs_is_multi_device(sbi)) {
> > + u64 sectors = 0;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < sbi->s_ndevs; i++)
> > + sectors += get_sectors_written(FDEV(i).bdev);
> > +
> > + return sectors;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return get_sectors_written(sbi->sb->s_bdev);
> > +}
> > +
> > static int do_checkpoint(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct cp_control *cpc)
> > {
> > struct f2fs_checkpoint *ckpt = F2FS_CKPT(sbi);
> > diff --cc fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > index 5cd1b9f7cc53,49681a8d2b14..000000000000
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
> > diff --cc fs/f2fs/super.c
> > index 47858e0c5e95,af9f449da64b..000000000000
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>
> Just a reminder that the above conflict still exists.

This is now a conflict between the f2fs tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-12-17 02:53    [W:0.049 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site