lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: manual merge of the cifs tree with the fscache tree
Hi all,

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 12:43:17 +0000 broonie@kernel.org wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the cifs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/cifs/inode.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 830c476f5eb82 ("cifs: Support fscache indexing rewrite (untested)")
>
> from the fscache tree and commit:
>
> 68f87ec9c1ce3 ("cifs: ignore resource_id while getting fscache super cookie")

This is now commit

b774302e8856 ("cifs: ignore resource_id while getting fscache super cookie")

in Linus' tree.

> from the cifs tree.
>
> diff --cc fs/cifs/inode.c
> index dc2fe76450b96,279622e4eb1c2..0000000000000
> --- a/fs/cifs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/cifs/inode.c
> @@@ -1372,20 -1370,6 +1367,7 @@@ iget_no_retry
> iget_failed(inode);
> inode = ERR_PTR(rc);
> }
> +
> - if (!rc) {
> - /*
> - * The cookie is initialized from volume info returned above.
> - * Inside cifs_fscache_get_super_cookie it checks
> - * that we do not get super cookie twice.
> - */
> - rc = cifs_fscache_get_super_cookie(tcon);
> - if (rc < 0) {
> - iget_failed(inode);
> - inode = ERR_PTR(rc);
> - }
> - }
> out:
> kfree(path);
> free_xid(xid);

so this is now a conflict between the fscache tree and Linus's tree.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-12-20 00:47    [W:0.093 / U:0.896 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site