Hi Matthew, On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 13:12:05 +0000 Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 06:00:43PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got conflicts in: > > > > include/linux/mm.h > > include/linux/rmap.h > > mm/gup.c > > mm/huge_memory.c > > mm/internal.h > > mm/memory-failure.c > > mm/migrate.c > > mm/mlock.c > > mm/rmap.c > > mm/vmscan.c > > > > There is no way I can figure out in a reasonable time (or at all > > probably) the resolution needed here. You guys need to get together > > and figure out how the folio tree changes are going to progress to > > Linus' tree. > > > > I have gone back and used the folio tree from next-20220204 again for > > today. > > Thanks! > > My plan is to take v2 of Hugh's mlock rewrite into my tree today and > redo the folio changes on top of those. That should reduce the amount > of conflict between akpm's tree and the folio tree to the usual > managable amount. Let's see how that goes. > It looks like Andrew now has a new version of Hugh's patches and there are quite a few other conflicts as well (see my attempt at mm/gup.c). I have used the folio tree from next-20220204 again for today, sorry. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgpJ8YeJzfmtR.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
