From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933140AbdC3AHq (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 20:07:46 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:50279 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932757AbdC3AHo (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 20:07:44 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:07:40 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Al Viro Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Josef Bacik , Jens Axboe Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with Linus' tree Message-ID: <20170330110740.36c39581@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Al, Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in: drivers/block/nbd.c between commit: 9dd5d3ab49f7 ("nbd: handle ERESTARTSYS properly") from Linus' tree and commit: 7c09d0a53c27 ("backmerge of nbd.c changes, resolving conflicts") from the vfs tree. I fixed it up (I used the former change) 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. Its probably time that the vfs tree was cleaned up after the last merge window. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell