From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751874AbdFMDPV (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2017 23:15:21 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:53313 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751753AbdFMDPT (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2017 23:15:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:15:17 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Jens Axboe , David Sterba Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the btrfs-kdave tree Message-ID: <20170613131517.42918886@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 Jens, Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in: fs/btrfs/compression.c between commit: c1045c6859c1 ("btrfs: opencode trivial compressed_bio_alloc, simplify error handling") from the btrfs-kdave tree and commit: 4e4cbee93d56 ("block: switch bios to blk_status_t") from the block tree. I fixed it up (the former removed one of the hunks fo code updated by the latter) 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. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell