Hi all,
On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 10:56:29 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the bpf-next tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/coda/inode.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 626c2be9822d ("coda: use param->file for FSCONFIG_SET_FD")
>
> from the vfs-brauner tree and commit:
>
> 1da91ea87aef ("introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to it.")
>
> from the bpf-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the former removed the code modified by the latter, so I
> used the former) 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.
This is now a conflict between the vfs tree and the vfs-branuer tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgp0eWdimBAyP.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
