Hi all,
On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 10:07:37 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the file-locks tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/nfs/file.c
>
> between commit:
>
> c045f1c40a48 ("nfs: don't allow reexport reclaims")
>
> from the cel tree and commit:
>
> f7e33bdbd6d1 ("fs: remove mandatory file locking support")
>
> from the file-locks 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.
>
> diff --cc fs/nfs/file.c
> index 7411658f8b05,514be5d28d70..000000000000
> --- a/fs/nfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
> @@@ -806,13 -806,6 +806,9 @@@ int nfs_lock(struct file *filp, int cmd
>
> nfs_inc_stats(inode, NFSIOS_VFSLOCK);
>
> + if (fl->fl_flags & FL_RECLAIM)
> + return -ENOGRACE;
> +
> - /* No mandatory locks over NFS */
> - if (__mandatory_lock(inode) && fl->fl_type != F_UNLCK)
> - goto out_err;
> -
> if (NFS_SERVER(inode)->flags & NFS_MOUNT_LOCAL_FCNTL)
> is_local = 1;
>
This is now a conflict between the cel tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgpGVXWfI4aCQ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
