Hi Al, Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in: fs/afs/super.c between commits: f044c8847bb6 ("afs: Lay the groundwork for supporting network namespaces") 49566f6f06b3 ("afs: Note the cell in the superblock info also") from Linus' tree and commit: c2c6773f9942 ("VFS: Roll out mount flag differentiation (MS_* -> SB_*) generally") from the vfs tree. I fixed it up (see below) 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. P.S. Dave, do you feel like having an afs tree in linux-next for next time? -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell diff --cc fs/afs/super.c index 875b5eb02242,a8c1e00c4dd0..000000000000 --- a/fs/afs/super.c +++ b/fs/afs/super.c @@@ -493,19 -465,20 +493,19 @@@ static struct dentry *afs_mount(struct /* initial superblock/root creation */ _debug("create"); ret = afs_fill_super(sb, ¶ms); - if (ret < 0) { - deactivate_locked_super(sb); - goto error; - } + if (ret < 0) + goto error_sb; + as = NULL; - sb->s_flags |= MS_ACTIVE; + sb->s_flags |= SB_ACTIVE; } else { _debug("reuse"); - ASSERTCMP(sb->s_flags, &, MS_ACTIVE); + ASSERTCMP(sb->s_flags, &, SB_ACTIVE); - afs_put_volume(vol); - kfree(as); + afs_destroy_sbi(as); + as = NULL; } - afs_put_cell(params.cell); - kfree(new_opts); + afs_put_cell(params.net, params.cell); + key_put(params.key); _leave(" = 0 [%p]", sb); return dget(sb->s_root); -- 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