Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tomoyo tree with the block tree
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20211124113825.2d9de813@canb.auug.org.au>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <cbeb57ae-5a87-9959-689f-d9d73baf6ee4@kernel.dk>
Date:   Tue, 23 Nov 2021 19:06:27 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20211124113825.2d9de813@canb.auug.org.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 11/23/21 5:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the tomoyo tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/block/loop.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   3793b8e18186 ("block: rename GENHD_FL_NO_PART_SCAN to GENHD_FL_NO_PART")
> 
> from the block tree and commits:
> 
>   dfb2cc3b7f7e ("loop: don't hold lo_mutex during __loop_clr_fd()")
>   51d5ae114da8 ("loop: replace loop_validate_mutex with loop_validate_spinlock")
> 
> from the tomoyo tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) 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.

Why does the tomoyo tree have loop commits is the question?

-- 
Jens Axboe