Hi Al,
Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in
fs/9p/vfs_file.c, fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c and fs/9p/vfs_inode.c between
commit 94876b5bb6a8 ("9P: introduction of a new cache=mmap model") from
the v9fs tree and commit 2b052ff59861 ("9p: make v9fs_cache_inode_
{get,put,set}_cookie empty inlines for !9P_CACHEFS") from the vfs tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
diff --cc fs/9p/vfs_file.c
index d1ab081f6a4e,a0df3e73c2b1..000000000000
--- a/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
+++ b/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
@@@ -107,12 -105,8 +107,10 @@@ int v9fs_file_open(struct inode *inode
v9inode->writeback_fid = (void *) fid;
}
mutex_unlock(&v9inode->v_mutex);
- #ifdef CONFIG_9P_FSCACHE
- if (v9ses->cache)
+ /* previous check would also set cookie with CACHE_LOOSE?
+ * set_cookie does a check if v9inode->fscache anyway... */
+ if (v9ses->cache == CACHE_FSCACHE)
v9fs_cache_inode_set_cookie(inode, file);
- #endif
return 0;
out_error:
p9_client_clunk(file->private_data);
diff --cc fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
index fd077485426b,4e65aa903345..000000000000
--- a/fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
+++ b/fs/9p/vfs_inode.c
@@@ -911,10 -901,8 +907,8 @@@ v9fs_vfs_atomic_open(struct inode *dir
goto error;
file->private_data = fid;
- #ifdef CONFIG_9P_FSCACHE
- if (v9ses->cache)
+ if (v9ses->cache == CACHE_LOOSE || v9ses->cache == CACHE_FSCACHE)
v9fs_cache_inode_set_cookie(dentry->d_inode, file);
- #endif
*opened |= FILE_CREATED;
out:
diff --cc fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c
index e68ca293fc9d,4c10edec26a0..000000000000
--- a/fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c
+++ b/fs/9p/vfs_inode_dotl.c
@@@ -356,10 -353,8 +354,8 @@@ v9fs_vfs_atomic_open_dotl(struct inode
if (err)
goto err_clunk_old_fid;
file->private_data = ofid;
- #ifdef CONFIG_9P_FSCACHE
- if (v9ses->cache)
+ if (v9ses->cache == CACHE_LOOSE || v9ses->cache == CACHE_FSCACHE)
v9fs_cache_inode_set_cookie(inode, file);
- #endif
*opened |= FILE_CREATED;
out:
v9fs_put_acl(dacl, pacl);
Attachment:
pgp_QeBqgRnmB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
