Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in: block/blk-core.c between commit: 3f9b8fb46e5d ("Use bdev_is_paritition() instead of open-coding it") from the vfs tree and commit: 99dc422335d8 ("block: support to account io_ticks precisely") from the block 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 block/blk-core.c index a4035dc7640d,01186333c88e..000000000000 --- a/block/blk-core.c +++ b/block/blk-core.c @@@ -990,11 -986,12 +989,12 @@@ void update_io_ticks(struct block_devic unsigned long stamp; again: stamp = READ_ONCE(part->bd_stamp); - if (unlikely(time_after(now, stamp))) { - if (likely(try_cmpxchg(&part->bd_stamp, &stamp, now))) - __part_stat_add(part, io_ticks, end ? now - stamp : 1); - } + if (unlikely(time_after(now, stamp)) && + likely(try_cmpxchg(&part->bd_stamp, &stamp, now)) && + (end || part_in_flight(part))) + __part_stat_add(part, io_ticks, now - stamp); + - if (part->bd_partno) { + if (bdev_is_partition(part)) { part = bdev_whole(part); goto again; }
Attachment:
pgpplYFlfZRpS.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature