On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:49:48AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
>
> between commit:
>
> b2197a36c0ef ("xfs: remove XFS_IFEXTENTS")
>
> from the xfs tree and commit:
>
> 9fefd5db08ce ("xfs:
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/f2fs/namei.c
between commit:
5f029c045c94 ("f2fs: clean up build warnings")
from the f2fs tree and commit:
80e5d1ff5d5f ("useful constants: struct qstr for ".."")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and ca
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
between commit:
b2197a36c0ef ("xfs: remove XFS_IFEXTENTS")
from the xfs tree and commit:
9fefd5db08ce ("xfs: convert to fileattr")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 12:22:11PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
>
> between commits:
>
> ceaf603c7024 ("xfs: move the di_projid field to struct xfs_inode")
> 031474c28a3a ("xfs: move the di_
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
between commits:
ceaf603c7024 ("xfs: move the di_projid field to struct xfs_inode")
031474c28a3a ("xfs: move the di_extsize field to struct xfs_inode")
b33ce57d3e61 ("xfs: move the di_cowextsize field
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/overlayfs/file.c
between commit:
d46b7cd68336 ("ovl: plumb through flush method")
from the overlayfs tree and commit:
ae7db6c8bc98 ("ovl: remove unneeded ioctls")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and ca
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/btrfs/ioctl.c
between commit:
2911da32d543 ("btrfs: use btrfs_inode_lock/btrfs_inode_unlock inode lock
helpers")
from the btrfs tree and commit:
d9b32b140987 ("btrfs: convert to fileattr")
from the vfs tree.
I fix
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/cifs/file.c
between commit:
4c7b707d72f5 ("cifs: revalidate mapping when we open files for SMB1 POSIX")
from the cifs tree and commit:
4d66952a2032 ("cifs: have cifs_fattr_to_inode() refuse to change type on live
in
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/m68k/Kconfig
between commit:
dc072012bc94 ("m68k: Sort selects in main Kconfig")
from the m68k tree and commit:
5e6e9852d6f7 ("uaccess: add infrastructure for kernel builds with set_fs()")
from the vfs tree.
I fi
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/s390/include/asm/checksum.h
between commit:
98ad45fb58c1 ("s390/checksum: coding style changes")
from the s390 tree and commit:
6e41c585e38f ("unify generic instances of csum_partial_copy_nocheck()")
from the vfs
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/m68k/Kconfig
between commit:
dc072012bc94 ("m68k: Sort selects in main Kconfig")
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven
from the m68k tree and commit:
0d4ca5778ffd ("uaccess: add infrastructure for kernel builds with set_fs()")
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
between commit:
5714ee50bb43 ("copy_xstate_to_kernel: Fix typo which caused GDB regression")
from Linus' tree and commit:
0557d64d983e ("x86: switch to ->regset_get()")
from the vfs tree.
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
between commit:
5714ee50bb43 ("copy_xstate_to_kernel: Fix typo which caused GDB regression")
from Linus' tree and commit:
c196049cc732 ("x86: switch to ->regset_get()")
from the vfs tree.
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace/ptrace-view.c
between commit:
e0d8e991be64 ("powerpc/book3s64/kuap: Move UAMOR setup to key init function")
from the powerpc tree and commit:
5e39a71bddb3 ("powerpc: switch to ->regset_get()")
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 03:36:13PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:40:07AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
>
> > I'm fine with that, although I think it's mainly with vfs changes
> > so could be better though with vfs tree. I will add this patch
> > tomorrow anyway... Thanks for reminde
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:40:07AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> I'm fine with that, although I think it's mainly with vfs changes
> so could be better though with vfs tree. I will add this patch
> tomorrow anyway... Thanks for reminder!
FWIW, my reasoning here is
* erofs tree exists and
Hi Al,
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 02:51:11AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:45:01AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > fs/erofs/super.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > e7cda1ee94f4 ("erofs:
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:45:01AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/erofs/super.c
>
> between commit:
>
> e7cda1ee94f4 ("erofs: code cleanup by removing ifdef macro surrounding")
>
> from the erofs tree and comm
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/erofs/super.c
between commit:
e7cda1ee94f4 ("erofs: code cleanup by removing ifdef macro surrounding")
from the erofs tree and commit:
91a7c5e1d30e ("erofs: convert to use the new mount fs_context api")
from the vfs
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:17:52AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> On 2020/5/14 14:05, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> > On 2020/5/13 20:50, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:04:02PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> > > > On 2020/5/13 6:03, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020
On 2020/5/14 14:05, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
On 2020/5/13 20:50, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:04:02PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
On 2020/5/13 6:03, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Luis Chamberlain writes:
On Tue, May
On 2020/5/13 20:50, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:04:02PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
On 2020/5/13 6:03, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Luis Chamberlain writes:
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. B
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 09:44:40AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>
> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 08:42:30AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Luis Chamberlain writes:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> >> Luis Chambe
Luis Chamberlain writes:
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 08:42:30AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> >> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>> >>
>> >> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. B
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 08:42:30AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>
> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Luis Chamberlain writes:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> >> Luis Chambe
Luis Chamberlain writes:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> >> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>> >>
>> >> > +static struct ctl_table fs_base_table[] = {
>> >>
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:04:02PM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> On 2020/5/13 6:03, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > Luis Chamberlain writes:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > >
On 2020/5/13 6:03, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Luis Chamberlain writes:
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Luis Chamberlain writes:
+static struct ctl_table fs_base_table[] = {
+ {
+
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:40:55PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>
> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Luis Chamberlain writes:
> >>
> >> > +static struct ctl_table fs_base_table[] = {
> >> > +{
> >> > +
Luis Chamberlain writes:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>>
>> > +static struct ctl_table fs_base_table[] = {
>> > + {
>> > + .procname = "fs",
>> > + .mode = 0555,
>> > + .child
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 06:52:35AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Luis Chamberlain writes:
>
> > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:55:16AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> >> On 2020/5/11 9:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in
Luis Chamberlain writes:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:55:16AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
>> On 2020/5/11 9:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>> >
>> >kernel/sysctl.c
>> >
>> > between commit:
>> >
>> >b6522fa4
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:22:04PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:33:05AM +, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:55:16AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> > > On 2020/5/11 9:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:33:05AM +, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:55:16AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> > On 2020/5/11 9:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > >kernel/sysctl.c
> >
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:55:16AM +0800, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
> On 2020/5/11 9:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
> >
> >kernel/sysctl.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> >b6522fa409cf ("parisc: add sysctl file interfac
On 2020/5/11 9:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
kernel/sysctl.c
between commit:
b6522fa409cf ("parisc: add sysctl file interface panic_on_stackoverflow")
from the parisc-hd tree and commit:
f461d2dcd511 ("sysctl: avoid
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/mips/lasat/sysctl.c
between commit:
10760dde9be3 ("MIPS: Remove support for LASAT")
from the mips tree and commit:
32927393dc1c ("sysctl: pass kernel pointers to ->proc_handler")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
kernel/sysctl.c
between commit:
b6522fa409cf ("parisc: add sysctl file interface panic_on_stackoverflow")
from the parisc-hd tree and commit:
f461d2dcd511 ("sysctl: avoid forward declarations")
from the vfs tree.
I fi
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 3:40 PM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/ubifs/super.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 9163e0184bd7d5f ("ubifs: Fix memory leak bug in alloc_ubifs_info() error
> path")
>
> from the ubifs tree and commit:
>
>
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/ubifs/super.c
between commit:
9163e0184bd7d5f ("ubifs: Fix memory leak bug in alloc_ubifs_info() error
path")
from the ubifs tree and commit:
50d7aad57710e2b ("vfs: Convert ubifs to use the new mount API")
from the
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 09:23:17AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Al,
>
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 16:30:04 +0100 Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > ... originals cheerfully dropped; will be gone in today's push to
> > vfs.git#for-next.
>
> Not pushed out yet?
Give me about fifteen minutes...
Hi Al,
On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 16:30:04 +0100 Al Viro wrote:
>
> ... originals cheerfully dropped; will be gone in today's push to
> vfs.git#for-next.
Not pushed out yet?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgpC6lmOgb0FJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 05:10:27PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 11:00 AM Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 5:01 AM Stephen Rothwell
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > > fs
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 11:00 AM Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 5:01 AM Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > fs/fuse/inode.c
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 1458e5e9f99a ("fuse: extract fuse_fi
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 5:01 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/fuse/inode.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 1458e5e9f99a ("fuse: extract fuse_fill_super_common()")
>
> from the fuse tree and commit:
>
> 2ad9ab0f7429 ("vfs: C
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/fuse/inode.c
between commit:
1458e5e9f99a ("fuse: extract fuse_fill_super_common()")
from the fuse tree and commit:
2ad9ab0f7429 ("vfs: Convert fuse to use the new mount API")
48ceb15f98c8 ("vfs: Move the subtype p
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/ceph/super.c
between commit:
8e4133936f30 ("ceph: auto reconnect after blacklisted")
from the ceph tree and commit:
d91c9998290b ("vfs: Convert ceph to use the new mount API")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (Than
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/ceph/super.c
between commit:
8e4133936f30 ("ceph: auto reconnect after blacklisted")
from the ceph tree and commit:
108f95bfaa56 ("vfs: Convert ceph to use the new mount API")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 12:15:31AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 08:45:10 -0400 "J. Bruce Fields"
> wrote:
> >
> > I did a fetch of
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
> >
> > and looked at the "master" branch and couldn't
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/ubifs/super.c
between commit:
eeabb9866e4c ("ubifs: Add support for zstd compression.")
from the ubifs tree and commit:
334d581528b9 ("vfs: Convert ubifs to use the new mount API")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up
Hi,
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 08:45:10 -0400 "J. Bruce Fields"
wrote:
>
> I did a fetch of
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
>
> and looked at the "master" branch and couldn't find that vfs commit. Am
> I looking in the wrong place?
Maybe you were just a li
On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 11:06:33AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
>
> between commits:
>
> e8a79fb14f6b ("nfsd: add nfsd/clients directory")
>
> from the nfsd tree and commit:
>
> 96a374a35f82 ("vfs: Conve
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
between commits:
e8a79fb14f6b ("nfsd: add nfsd/clients directory")
from the nfsd tree and commit:
96a374a35f82 ("vfs: Convert nfsctl to use the new mount API")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (Maybe?
Hi all,
On Fri, 3 May 2019 11:15:10 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/orangefs/super.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 77becb76042a ("orangefs: implement xattr cache")
>
> from the orangefs tree and commit:
>
> f276ae0dd6d0 ("
Hi all,
On Fri, 3 May 2019 11:09:51 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/ext4/super.c
> fs/f2fs/super.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 2c58d548f570 ("fscrypt: cache decrypted symlink target in ->i_link")
>
> from the fscrypt tree
Hi all,
On Tue, 7 May 2019 09:53:23 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/fuse/inode.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 829f949b6e06 ("fuse: clean up fuse_alloc_inode")
>
> from the fuse tree and commit:
>
> 9baf28bbfe
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/fuse/inode.c
between commit:
829f949b6e06 ("fuse: clean up fuse_alloc_inode")
from the fuse tree and commit:
9baf28bbfea1 ("fuse: switch to ->free_inode()")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carr
Hi Mike,
On Fri, 3 May 2019 13:34:49 -0400 Mike Marshall wrote:
>
> I noticed the conflict too when I added Al's patch series to the orangefs
> tree we have on next. I understood Linus to say he'd fix the conflict the
> way you did during the merge window. I guess that means you'll have to
> keep
Hi Stephen...
I noticed the conflict too when I added Al's patch series to the orangefs
tree we have on next. I understood Linus to say he'd fix the conflict the
way you did during the merge window. I guess that means you'll have to
keep fixing it on next until then... I hate causing trouble, let
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
samples/Makefile
between commit:
a757ed09d672 ("samples: guard sub-directories with CONFIG options")
from the kbuild tree and commit:
f1b5618e013a ("vfs: Add a sample program for the new mount API")
from the vfs tree.
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/orangefs/super.c
between commit:
77becb76042a ("orangefs: implement xattr cache")
from the orangefs tree and commit:
f276ae0dd6d0 ("orangefs: make use of ->free_inode()")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/ext4/super.c
fs/f2fs/super.c
between commit:
2c58d548f570 ("fscrypt: cache decrypted symlink target in ->i_link")
from the fscrypt tree and commits:
94053139d482 ("ext4: make use of ->free_inode()")
d01718a050d0
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
kernel/cgroup/cgroup-v1.c
between commit:
61aa329d0762 ("cgroup: saner refcounting for cgroup_root")
from the vfs-fixes tree and commit:
b3678086951a ("kernfs, sysfs, cgroup, intel_rdt: Support fs_context")
from the vf
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
kernel/cgroup/cgroup-internal.h
between commit:
61aa329d0762 ("cgroup: saner refcounting for cgroup_root")
from the vfs-fixes tree and commit:
b3678086951a ("kernfs, sysfs, cgroup, intel_rdt: Support fs_context")
from
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
kernel/cgroup/cgroup-v1.c
between commit:
3fc9c12d27b4 ("cgroup: Add named hierarchy disabling to cgroup_no_v1 boot
param")
from Linus' tree and commit:
b3678086951a ("kernfs, sysfs, cgroup, intel_rdt: Support fs_conte
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in:
kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c
between commit:
e250d91d6575 ("cgroup: fix parsing empty mount option string")
from Linus' tree and commit:
b3678086951a ("kernfs, sysfs, cgroup, intel_rdt: Support fs_context")
from the vfs tree.
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/Makefile
between commit:
d44170a7ba48 ("fs: common implementation of file type")
from the ext3 tree and commits:
fe43eec04841 ("vfs: Introduce fs_context, switch vfs_kern_mount() to it.")
82685adaccb3 ("vfs: Add con
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
include/linux/fs.h
between commit:
a2bd7d2fc32c ("fs-verity: add setup code, UAPI, and Kconfig")
from the fscrypt tree and commit:
013c7af575e5 ("vfs: Implement a filesystem superblock creation/configuration
context")
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
include/linux/fs.h
between commit:
a2bd7d2fc32c ("fs-verity: add setup code, UAPI, and Kconfig")
from the fscrypt tree and commit:
37744f3d21f8 ("vfs: Implement a filesystem superblock creation/configuration
context")
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/Makefile
between commit:
d44170a7ba48 ("fs: common implementation of file type")
from the ext3 tree and commits:
229e55402816 ("vfs: Add configuration parser helpers")
37744f3d21f8 ("vfs: Implement a filesystem supe
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:52:47AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> [I don't understand why all this new work turned up in the xfs tree
> during the merge window ...]
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/read_write.c
>
> between commits:
>
> 42
Hi all,
[I don't understand why all this new work turned up in the xfs tree
during the merge window ...]
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/read_write.c
between commits:
42ec3d4c0218 ("vfs: make remap_file_range functions take and return bytes
completed")
eca
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/compat_ioctl.c
between commit:
77654350306a ("take compat TIOC[SG]SERIAL treatment into tty_compat_ioctl()")
from Linus' tree and commit:
69374d063be0 ("compat_ioctl: remove pointless HCI... ioctls")
from the vfs tre
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
between commit:
64dbf4dc5496 ("SUNRPC: Simplify TCP receive code")
from the nfsd tree and commit:
aa563d7bca6e ("iov_iter: Separate type from direction and use accessor
functions")
from the vfs tre
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/ceph/file.c
between commit:
fce7a9744bdf ("ceph: refactor ceph_sync_read()")
from the ceph tree and commit:
00e23707442a ("iov_iter: Use accessor function")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/f2fs/super.c
between commit:
f80f781514ef ("f2fs: checkpoint disabling")
from the f2fs tree and commit:
307c6e5241b4 ("vfs: Require specification of size of mount data for internal
mounts")
from the vfs tree.
I fix
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in:
fs/btrfs/inode.c
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
Commits
8e5d411c91c1 ("btrfs: simplify btrfs_iget()")
cfac83868124 ("btrfs: lift make_bad_inode() into btrfs_iget()")
efa119590db3 ("btrfs: IS_ERR(p) && PTR_ERR(p) == n is a weird w
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 04:04:55PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> First of all, I'm still not at all convinced that this "noaccount" thing is
> sane, especially since path_open() is exported. But that aside,
> __get_empty_filp()
> needs to be shot, just for the name and calling conventions alone.
>
> I
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:17:36AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> --- a/fs/open.c
> +++ b/fs/open.c
> @@@ -731,7 -732,6 +721,7 @@@ static int do_dentry_open(struct file *
> static const struct file_operations empty_fops = {};
> int error;
>
> - WARN_ON(f->f_mode & ~FMODE_NOACCO
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
include/linux/fs.h
between commit:
5c299f73cc9e ("vfs: add path_open()")
from the overlayfs tree and commit:
bfd4fa6990f0 ("turn filp_clone_open() into inline wrapper for dentry_open()")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in:
fs/open.c
between commit:
d4d6f39c507e ("vfs: optionally don't account file in nr_files")
88498a6bd8d1 ("vfs: simplify dentry_open()")
from the overlayfs tree and commit:
5f0cc0005d2e ("introduce FMODE_OPENED")
13fcc
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:40 AM, David Howells wrote:
> Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
>> /* These sb flags are internal to the kernel */
>> #define MS_SUBMOUNT (1<<26)
>> -#define MS_NOREMOTELOCK (1<<27)
>> #define MS_NOSEC (1<<28)
>> #define MS_BORN (1<<29)
>> #define
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> /* These sb flags are internal to the kernel */
> #define MS_SUBMOUNT (1<<26)
> -#define MS_NOREMOTELOCK (1<<27)
> #define MS_NOSEC (1<<28)
> #define MS_BORN (1<<29)
> #define MS_ACTIVE(1<<30)
Ummm... Can MS_NOREMOTELOCK be removed?
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
include/uapi/linux/fs.h
between commit:
1d91ca426d8d ("Partially revert "locks: fix file locking on overlayfs"")
from the overlayfs tree and commit:
28514d1edad4 ("vfs: Suppress MS_* flag defs within the kernel unless
e
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in:
include/linux/fs.h
between commit:
e8f97b0a52b3 ("vfs: optionally don't account file in nr_files")
from the overlayfs tree and commit:
db39e40a9682 ("new syscall: open_tree(2)")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see bel
Hi all,
On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:30:35 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/read_write.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 63ea46a359b2 ("vfs: dedupe: extract helper for a single dedup")
>
> from the overlayfs tree and commit:
>
> 22
Hi all,
On Fri, 1 Jun 2018 11:56:19 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> include/linux/fs.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 29aca8b3f7cd ("fsnotify: introduce prototype struct fsnotify_obj")
>
> from the ext3 tree and commit:
>
> d9
Hi all,
On Tue, 29 May 2018 11:30:35 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/read_write.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 63ea46a359b2 ("vfs: dedupe: extract helper for a single dedup")
>
> from the overlayfs tree and commit:
>
> 22
Hi,
On Fri 01-06-18 11:56:19, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> include/linux/fs.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 29aca8b3f7cd ("fsnotify: introduce prototype struct fsnotify_obj")
>
> from the ext3 tree and commit:
>
> d9a08a9e616b ("fs:
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
include/linux/fs.h
between commit:
29aca8b3f7cd ("fsnotify: introduce prototype struct fsnotify_obj")
from the ext3 tree and commit:
d9a08a9e616b ("fs: Add aio iopriority support")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (se
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/afs/fsclient.c
between commit:
684b0f68cf1c ("afs: Fix AFSFetchStatus decoder to provide OpenAFS
compatibility")
from Linus' tree and commit:
c875c76a061d ("afs: Fix a Sparse warning in xdr_decode_AFSFetchStatus()")
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/read_write.c
between commit:
63ea46a359b2 ("vfs: dedupe: extract helper for a single dedup")
from the overlayfs tree and commit:
227627114799 ("fs: avoid fdput() after failed fdget() in
vfs_dedupe_file_range()")
fr
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
arch/sparc/kernel/sys_sparc32.c
between commits:
4b5d3cc0fff9 ("fs: add ksys_ftruncate() wrapper; remove in-kernel calls to
sys_ftruncate()")
316dd9ee7b15 ("fs: add ksys_sync_file_range helper(); remove in-kernel calls
t
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/internal.h
fs/open.c
between various commits from the syscall tree and commit:
cab64df19466 ("fs: fold open_check_o_direct into do_dentry_open")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as ne
Hi all,
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:31:55 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/dcache.c
>
> between commit:
>
> f9c34674bc60 ("vfs: factor out helpers d_instantiate_anon() and
> d_alloc_anon()")
>
> from the overlayfs tree and c
Hi all,
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:31:55 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> + if (!disconnected) {
> -hlist_bl_lock(&tmp->d_sb->s_roots);
> -hlist_bl_add_head(&tmp->d_hash, &tmp->d_sb->s_roots);
> -hlist_bl_unlock(&tmp->d_sb->s_roots);
> ++hlist_
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/dcache.c
between commit:
f9c34674bc60 ("vfs: factor out helpers d_instantiate_anon() and
d_alloc_anon()")
from the overlayfs tree and commit:
f1ee616214cb ("VFS: don't keep disconnected dentries on d_anon")
from the
Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
ipc/mqueue.c
between commit:
1751e8a6cb93 ("Rename superblock flags (MS_xyz -> SB_xyz)")
from Linus' tree and commit:
946086abeddf ("mqueue: switch to on-demand creation of internal mount")
from the vfs tree.
I fixed i
Hi Jann,
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:48:14 +0100 Jann Horn wrote:
>
> > I can't tell if the strlen test from the former is still needed, so I
> > just used the vfs tree version for now.
>
> Yeah, both of the checks from the netfilter tree are still necessary
> independent of the commit from the vfs
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Al,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> net/netfilter/xt_bpf.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 6ab405114b0b ("netfilter: xt_bpf: add overflow checks")
>
> from the netfilter tree and commit:
>
> af58d2496b49
1 - 100 of 229 matches
Mail list logo
