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
