On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 11:22:44AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> Documentation/filesystems/porting
>
> between commit:
>
> 1a16dbaf798c ("Document d_splice_alias() calling conventions for ->lookup() users.")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 2e5dfc99f2e6 ("vfs: combine the clone and dedupe into a single remap_file_range")
>
> from the xfs 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.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc Documentation/filesystems/porting
> index 321d74b73937,e6d4466268dd..000000000000
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/porting
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/porting
> @@@ -623,13 -623,7 +623,18 @@@ in your dentry operations instead
> On success you get a new struct file sharing the mount/dentry with the
> original, on failure - ERR_PTR().
> --
> +[recommended]
> + ->lookup() instances doing an equivalent of
> + if (IS_ERR(inode))
> + return ERR_CAST(inode);
> + return d_splice_alias(inode, dentry);
> + don't need to bother with the check - d_splice_alias() will do the
> + right thing when given ERR_PTR(...) as inode. Moreover, passing NULL
> + inode to d_splice_alias() will also do the right thing (equivalent of
> + d_add(dentry, NULL); return NULL;), so that kind of special cases
> + also doesn't need a separate treatment.
> ++--
> + [mandatory]
> + ->clone_file_range() and ->dedupe_file_range have been replaced with
> + ->remap_file_range(). See Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt for more
> + information.
Looks good - I knew about this one from merging back into a recent
Linus kernel.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
