On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 10:48:56PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:25:12AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in: > > > > fs/nfs/dir.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 227823d2074d ("nfs: optimise readdir cache page invalidation") > > > > from the nfs-anna tree and commit: > > > > ef3af2d44331 ("nfs: optimise readdir cache page invalidation") > > > > from the vfs tree. > > > > I fixed it up (I used the nfs-anna tree version) 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. > > Umm... OK, I'll redo that merge; FWIW, the only reason I pull that > branch in the first place is that bunch of fixups needed to accomodate > it for work.fs_parse changes. Done - #merge.nfs-fs_parse and #for-next regenerated and force-pushed