Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:
fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
between commit:
f135cea30de5 ("btrfs: fix partial loss of prealloc extent past i_size after fsync")
from the btrfs-fixes tree and commit:
e94d318f12cd ("btrfs: fix partial loss of prealloc extent past i_size after fsync")
from the btrfs tree.
I fixed it up (I just used the latter) 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
On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 10:28:25AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/btrfs/tree-log.c
>
> between commit:
>
> f135cea30de5 ("btrfs: fix partial loss of prealloc extent past i_size after fsync")
>
> from the btrfs-fixes tree and commit:
>
> e94d318f12cd ("btrfs: fix partial loss of prealloc extent past i_size after fsync")
Conflicts in the above commit and "btrfs: force chunk allocation if our
global rsv is larger than metadata" should be gone now. Both patches
have been merged to master and fresh for-next branch pushed to k.org.