Hi Jens,
Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in
block/blk-flush.c between commit 255bb490c8c27eed484d538efe6ef6a7473bd3f6
("block: blk-flush shouldn't call directly into q->request_fn()
__blk_run_queue()") from the tree and commit
ae1b1539622fb46e51b4d13b3f9e5f4c713f86ae ("block: reimplement FLUSH/FUA
to support merge") from the block tree.
The latter rewrote a large part of the file, so I just used that. If
this is not correct, please fix it up in the block tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Hello, Stephen, Jens.
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 01:19:58PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in
> block/blk-flush.c between commit 255bb490c8c27eed484d538efe6ef6a7473bd3f6
> ("block: blk-flush shouldn't call directly into q->request_fn()
> __blk_run_queue()") from the tree and commit
> ae1b1539622fb46e51b4d13b3f9e5f4c713f86ae ("block: reimplement FLUSH/FUA
> to support merge") from the block tree.
>
> The latter rewrote a large part of the file, so I just used that. If
> this is not correct, please fix it up in the block tree.
I sent Jens a merge commit which should fix this yesterday.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1101766/focus=1108915
So, the merge problem should go away soonish.
Thank you.
--
tejun
On 2011-03-07 07:36, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Stephen, Jens.
>
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 01:19:58PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in
>> block/blk-flush.c between commit 255bb490c8c27eed484d538efe6ef6a7473bd3f6
>> ("block: blk-flush shouldn't call directly into q->request_fn()
>> __blk_run_queue()") from the tree and commit
>> ae1b1539622fb46e51b4d13b3f9e5f4c713f86ae ("block: reimplement FLUSH/FUA
>> to support merge") from the block tree.
>>
>> The latter rewrote a large part of the file, so I just used that. If
>> this is not correct, please fix it up in the block tree.
>
> I sent Jens a merge commit which should fix this yesterday.
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1101766/focus=1108915
>
> So, the merge problem should go away soonish.
Merged now, so this conflict should be gone from linux-next as of now.
--
Jens Axboe
Still merge conflicts with last commit [1].
- Sedat -
[1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git;a=commit;h=b873c5d692d4d5453cceed18bb06c62bb1a73ac0
$ git log -1 | cat
commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
$ git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
for-next
remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
* branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
rename detection
warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
rename detection
Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-03-07 07:36, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hello, Stephen, Jens.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 01:19:58PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in
>>> block/blk-flush.c between commit 255bb490c8c27eed484d538efe6ef6a7473bd3f6
>>> ("block: blk-flush shouldn't call directly into q->request_fn()
>>> __blk_run_queue()") from the tree and commit
>>> ae1b1539622fb46e51b4d13b3f9e5f4c713f86ae ("block: reimplement FLUSH/FUA
>>> to support merge") from the block tree.
>>>
>>> The latter rewrote a large part of the file, so I just used that. If
>>> this is not correct, please fix it up in the block tree.
>>
>> I sent Jens a merge commit which should fix this yesterday.
>>
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1101766/focus=1108915
>>
>> So, the merge problem should go away soonish.
>
> Merged now, so this conflict should be gone from linux-next as of now.
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> $ git log -1 | cat
> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>
> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>
> $ git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
> for-next
> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
> rename detection
> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
> rename detection
> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
branch.
Thanks.
--
tejun
On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> $ git log -1 | cat
>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>>
>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>
>> $ git pull
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
>> for-next
>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
>> rename detection
>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
>> rename detection
>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
>
> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
> branch.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun
>
I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
__blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
remains:
...
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
Lunch + City.
- Sedat -
On 2011-03-07 12:14, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> $ git log -1 | cat
>>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
>>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>>>
>>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> $ git pull
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
>>> for-next
>>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
>>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
>>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>>> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
>>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
>>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
>>> rename detection
>>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
>>> rename detection
>>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
>>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
>>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
>>
>> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
>> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
>> branch.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> --
>> tejun
>>
>
> I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
> __blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
> remains:
> ...
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>
> As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
> Lunch + City.
Just checked here, I can pull my for-next cleanly into Linus' master.
What is the block tree for-next branch sha?
--
Jens Axboe
On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-03-07 12:14, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> $ git log -1 | cat
>>>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
>>>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>>>>
>>>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> $ git pull
>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
>>>> for-next
>>>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
>>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
>>>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
>>>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
>>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>>>> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
>>>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
>>>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
>>>> rename detection
>>>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
>>>> rename detection
>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
>>>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
>>>
>>> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
>>> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
>>> branch.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> --
>>> tejun
>>>
>>
>> I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
>> __blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
>> remains:
>> ...
>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>
>> As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
>> Lunch + City.
>
> Just checked here, I can pull my for-next cleanly into Linus' master.
> What is the block tree for-next branch sha?
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
>
No, I tried to merge your for-next into linux-next (which will happen
with tomorrows linux-next).
[ linux-2.6-block.git#for-next ]
commit b873c5d692d4d5453cceed18bb06c62bb1a73ac0
"Merge branch 'block-for-2.6.39-core' of
ssh:///linux/kernel/git/tj/misc into for-2.6.39/core"
- Sedat -
On 2011-03-07 12:25, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2011-03-07 12:14, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>> $ git log -1 | cat
>>>>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
>>>>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>>>>>
>>>>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> $ git pull
>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
>>>>> for-next
>>>>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
>>>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
>>>>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
>>>>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
>>>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>>>>> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
>>>>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
>>>>> rename detection
>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
>>>>> rename detection
>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
>>>>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
>>>>
>>>> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
>>>> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
>>>> branch.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> tejun
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
>>> __blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
>>> remains:
>>> ...
>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>
>>> As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
>>> Lunch + City.
>>
>> Just checked here, I can pull my for-next cleanly into Linus' master.
>> What is the block tree for-next branch sha?
>>
>> --
>> Jens Axboe
>>
>>
>
> No, I tried to merge your for-next into linux-next (which will happen
> with tomorrows linux-next).
>
> [ linux-2.6-block.git#for-next ]
> commit b873c5d692d4d5453cceed18bb06c62bb1a73ac0
> "Merge branch 'block-for-2.6.39-core' of
> ssh:///linux/kernel/git/tj/misc into for-2.6.39/core"
linux-next should not have any CFQ changes that don't come from for-next
from the linux block tree. Are you pulling it into a linux-next that
already have some of the block changes?
--
Jens Axboe
On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-03-07 12:25, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 2011-03-07 12:14, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>> $ git log -1 | cat
>>>>>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
>>>>>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ git pull
>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
>>>>>> for-next
>>>>>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
>>>>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
>>>>>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
>>>>>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
>>>>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>>>>>> From
>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
>>>>>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
>>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
>>>>>> rename detection
>>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
>>>>>> rename detection
>>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
>>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
>>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
>>>>>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
>>>>> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
>>>>> branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> tejun
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
>>>> __blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
>>>> remains:
>>>> ...
>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>
>>>> As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
>>>> Lunch + City.
>>>
>>> Just checked here, I can pull my for-next cleanly into Linus' master.
>>> What is the block tree for-next branch sha?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jens Axboe
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No, I tried to merge your for-next into linux-next (which will happen
>> with tomorrows linux-next).
>>
>> [ linux-2.6-block.git#for-next ]
>> commit b873c5d692d4d5453cceed18bb06c62bb1a73ac0
>> "Merge branch 'block-for-2.6.39-core' of
>> ssh:///linux/kernel/git/tj/misc into for-2.6.39/core"
>
> linux-next should not have any CFQ changes that don't come from for-next
> from the linux block tree. Are you pulling it into a linux-next that
> already have some of the block changes?
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
>
I have reverted the manual merge-fix from Stephen as pointed out by Tejun.
As tig (utility) is broken with ncurses-5.8 in Debian/sid I currently
can't look through the commits.
So, I can't say if there were further modifications by merging block
stuff into linux-next.
I have added the last 5 commits to block/cfq-iosched.c as TXT.
- Sedat -
Hi Jens,
On Mon, 07 Mar 2011 12:16:12 +0100 Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 2011-03-07 12:14, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >>> $ git log -1 | cat
> >>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
> >>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
> >>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
> >>>
> >>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> $ git pull
> >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
> >>> for-next
> >>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
> >>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
> >>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
> >>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
> >>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
> >>> From git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
> >>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
> >>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
> >>> rename detection
> >>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
> >>> rename detection
> >>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
> >>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
> >>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
> >>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
> >>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
> >>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
> >>
> >> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
> >> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
> >> branch.
> >
> > I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
> > __blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
> > remains:
> > ...
> > CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
This is a different conflict that git resolved on its own.
> > As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
> > Lunch + City.
>
> Just checked here, I can pull my for-next cleanly into Linus' master.
> What is the block tree for-next branch sha?
This the correct test, trying to remerge a tree into linux-next is bound
to have some conflicts.
I will let you know tomorrow, but I expect no problems.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Hi Sedat,
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:25:23 +0100 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> No, I tried to merge your for-next into linux-next (which will happen
> with tomorrows linux-next).
No, it won't. Each day I start with Linus' tree and merge all the other
trees. Doing it the other way would lead to a real mess.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
On 2011-03-07 12:35, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2011-03-07 12:25, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On 2011-03-07 12:14, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>> On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>> $ git log -1 | cat
>>>>>>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
>>>>>>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> $ git pull
>>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
>>>>>>> for-next
>>>>>>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
>>>>>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
>>>>>>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
>>>>>>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
>>>>>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>>>>>>> From
>>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
>>>>>>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
>>>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping inexact
>>>>>>> rename detection
>>>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping inexact
>>>>>>> rename detection
>>>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
>>>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
>>>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
>>>>>>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
>>>>>> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
>>>>>> branch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> tejun
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
>>>>> __blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
>>>>> remains:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>
>>>>> As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
>>>>> Lunch + City.
>>>>
>>>> Just checked here, I can pull my for-next cleanly into Linus' master.
>>>> What is the block tree for-next branch sha?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jens Axboe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, I tried to merge your for-next into linux-next (which will happen
>>> with tomorrows linux-next).
>>>
>>> [ linux-2.6-block.git#for-next ]
>>> commit b873c5d692d4d5453cceed18bb06c62bb1a73ac0
>>> "Merge branch 'block-for-2.6.39-core' of
>>> ssh:///linux/kernel/git/tj/misc into for-2.6.39/core"
>>
>> linux-next should not have any CFQ changes that don't come from for-next
>> from the linux block tree. Are you pulling it into a linux-next that
>> already have some of the block changes?
>>
>> --
>> Jens Axboe
>>
>>
>
> I have reverted the manual merge-fix from Stephen as pointed out by Tejun.
>
> As tig (utility) is broken with ncurses-5.8 in Debian/sid I currently
> can't look through the commits.
> So, I can't say if there were further modifications by merging block
> stuff into linux-next.
> I have added the last 5 commits to block/cfq-iosched.c as TXT.
OK, I see Stephen already pointed out where things have gone wrong. I
try to ensure that it'll merge into Linus' git cleanly, so I know that
Stephen wont run into problems. Sometimes things will get fast tracked
into Linus' git and I don't update for-next in time, that's when
problems arise.
linux-next is a new tree everyday, you can't pull from it like you would
other development trees.
--
Jens Axboe
Thanks, I will wait till tommorrow with a new build of linux-next
(looks like this is one of this "manic mondays" and... more coffee).
Just looked in the meantime trough WildWildWeb and found a new
tig-0.17 which I could built successfully against ncurses-5.8 and this
was more important.
- Sedat -
On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-03-07 12:35, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 2011-03-07 12:25, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> On 3/7/11, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On 2011-03-07 12:14, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/7/11, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>> $ git log -1 | cat
>>>>>>>> commit c45165cd2c77843f24ca18af54044303dc2a81ab
>>>>>>>> Author: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> Date: Mon Mar 7 17:38:41 2011 +1100
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Add linux-next specific files for 20110307
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> $ git pull
>>>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git
>>>>>>>> for-next
>>>>>>>> remote: Counting objects: 158, done.
>>>>>>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (89/89), done.
>>>>>>>> remote: Total 106 (delta 87), reused 21 (delta 17)
>>>>>>>> Receiving objects: 100% (106/106), 23.33 KiB, done.
>>>>>>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (87/87), completed with 34 local objects.
>>>>>>>> From
>>>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block
>>>>>>>> * branch for-next -> FETCH_HEAD
>>>>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 1120 deleted: 637), skipping
>>>>>>>> inexact
>>>>>>>> rename detection
>>>>>>>> warning: too many files (created: 974 deleted: 462), skipping
>>>>>>>> inexact
>>>>>>>> rename detection
>>>>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-core.c
>>>>>>>> Auto-merging block/blk-flush.c
>>>>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/blk-flush.c
>>>>>>>> Auto-merging block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>>>> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ummm... don't those conflicts come from Stephen's commits? You would
>>>>>>> need to revert the merge and fixup commits and then pull in the block
>>>>>>> branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> tejun
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have reverted the merge-fix from Stephen "[PATCH] block: update for
>>>>>> __blk_run_queue() API update" which changed block/blk-flush.c, this
>>>>>> remains:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in block/cfq-iosched.c
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As it is 12p.m. and sun shining, my decision and direction is clear:
>>>>>> Lunch + City.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just checked here, I can pull my for-next cleanly into Linus' master.
>>>>> What is the block tree for-next branch sha?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jens Axboe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, I tried to merge your for-next into linux-next (which will happen
>>>> with tomorrows linux-next).
>>>>
>>>> [ linux-2.6-block.git#for-next ]
>>>> commit b873c5d692d4d5453cceed18bb06c62bb1a73ac0
>>>> "Merge branch 'block-for-2.6.39-core' of
>>>> ssh:///linux/kernel/git/tj/misc into for-2.6.39/core"
>>>
>>> linux-next should not have any CFQ changes that don't come from for-next
>>> from the linux block tree. Are you pulling it into a linux-next that
>>> already have some of the block changes?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jens Axboe
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I have reverted the manual merge-fix from Stephen as pointed out by Tejun.
>>
>> As tig (utility) is broken with ncurses-5.8 in Debian/sid I currently
>> can't look through the commits.
>> So, I can't say if there were further modifications by merging block
>> stuff into linux-next.
>> I have added the last 5 commits to block/cfq-iosched.c as TXT.
>
> OK, I see Stephen already pointed out where things have gone wrong. I
> try to ensure that it'll merge into Linus' git cleanly, so I know that
> Stephen wont run into problems. Sometimes things will get fast tracked
> into Linus' git and I don't update for-next in time, that's when
> problems arise.
>
> linux-next is a new tree everyday, you can't pull from it like you would
> other development trees.
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
>