On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:07:56AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the xfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 3e0a39654645 ("xfs: fix type confusion in xfs_ioc_swapext")
>
> from Linus' tree and commit:
>
> 7f1b62457b58 ("xfs: fix type confusion in xfs_ioc_swapext")
>
> from the xfs tree.
>
> These are not quite the same patch :-(
Yeah, I added comments to explain the code, because it's not obvious
why the check was added, and I couldn't find any other examples of
such checks in fs/. So, in five years time when I look at that code
again, the comment will remind me why it's a bad idea to remove what
appears to be an unnecesary check...
> I fixed it up (I used the version in the xfs tree) 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.
Yup, I planned to let Linus know. Patches in private emails that
aren't tagged [PATCH] in the subject line don't get the immediate
attention of my mail filters, so I didn't see it immediately.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
