Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220512182650.7d1a94c7@canb.auug.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <20220512182650.7d1a94c7@canb.auug.org.au>
From:   Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 May 2022 20:52:17 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKFNMokFYi4AGd8+B6sT73Pu9k_bAu53-d_u1=0fsiHbz3Jgxg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm tree with the folio tree
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Yang Li <yang.lee@linux.alibaba.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 5:26 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the mm tree got a conflict in:
>
>   fs/nilfs2/inode.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   f132ab7d3ab0 ("fs: Convert mpage_readpage to mpage_read_folio")
>
> from the folio tree and commit:
>
>   e38ed506c42f ("nilfs2: Fix some kernel-doc comments")
>
> from the mm 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.

Thanks, Stephen.

Andrew,  please once drop

 e38ed506c42f ("nilfs2: Fix some kernel-doc comments")

from -mm tree.   I will resend a modified patch after the folio patch is merged
to the mainline.

Thanks,
Ryusuke Konishi