On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 10:32:34AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:26:44AM -0500, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was > > generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing > > the project "XFS development tree". > > > > The branch, master has been updated > > a05931c xfs: remove the global xfs_Gqm structure > > b84a3a9 xfs: remove the per-filesystem list of dquots > > 9f920f1 xfs: use per-filesystem radix trees for dquot lookup > > f8739c3 xfs: per-filesystem dquot LRU lists > > 48776fd xfs: use common code for quota statistics > > from 8f639ddea0c4978ae9b4e46ea041c9e5afe0ee8d (commit) > > These updates have caused significant conflicts against the current > mainline tree: > > $ git merge xfs-oss/master > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_trans_dquot.c > CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in fs/xfs/xfs_trans_dquot.c > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_qm_syscalls.c > Removing fs/xfs/xfs_qm_stats.h > CONFLICT (modify/delete): fs/xfs/xfs_qm_stats.c deleted in xfs-oss/master and modified in HEAD. Version HEAD of fs/xfs/xfs_qm_stats.c left in tree. > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_qm.h > CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in fs/xfs/xfs_qm.h > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_qm.c > CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in fs/xfs/xfs_qm.c > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c > Auto-merging fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c > CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c > Auto-merging fs/quota/quota.c > Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. > $ > > The conflict is quite extensive, and appears to be caused by the two > quota commits in the mainline commit that are also in the master > branch not being resolved properly.... > > Anyone else seeing this when trying to merge the xfs master branch > into a mainline tree? Hrm... I've found that if you merge d0a3fe67e30261bb2018d2a06f33ff3303438c8e then 33e0edafd78d83273c14b14501cff063fac528e5 then oss/master it works fine. I wonder if there is a better way to resolve it. -Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
