On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:58:51AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the nfsd tree got a conflict in
> net/sunrpc/cache.c between commit
> 173912a6add00f4715774dcecf9ee53274c5924c ("SUNRPC: Move procfs-specific
> stuff out of the generic sunrpc cache code") from the nfs tree and commit
> f866a8194f7cbabb9135b98b9ac7d26237b88367 ("sunrpc/cache: rename
> queue_loose to cache_dequeue") from the nfsd tree.
OK, thanks.
Looks like there may be some less trivial conflicts now, though. Trond,
maybe you could rebase the cache stuff against my latest for-2.6.32?
--b.
>
> Just context changes. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary.
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> diff --cc net/sunrpc/cache.c
> index db7720e,d19c075..0000000
> --- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
> @@@ -884,7 -908,19 +884,7 @@@ static int cache_release(struct inode *
>
>
>
> - static void queue_loose(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *ch)
> -static const struct file_operations cache_file_operations = {
> - .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> - .llseek = no_llseek,
> - .read = cache_read,
> - .write = cache_write,
> - .poll = cache_poll,
> - .ioctl = cache_ioctl, /* for FIONREAD */
> - .open = cache_open,
> - .release = cache_release,
> -};
> -
> -
> + static void cache_dequeue(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *ch)
> {
> struct cache_queue *cq;
> spin_lock(&queue_lock);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
