Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 13:58:29 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>,
        "Vishal Moola (Oracle)" <vishal.moola@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mm-stable tree with the cifs tree
Message-ID: <Y/N8hVWeR3AjssUC@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20230220152933.1ab8fa4a@canb.auug.org.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230220152933.1ab8fa4a@canb.auug.org.au>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 03:29:33PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the mm-stable tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/cifs/file.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   c8859bc0c129 ("cifs: Remove unused code")
> 
> from the cifs tree and commits:
> 
>   4cda80f3a7a5 ("cifs: convert wdata_alloc_and_fillpages() to use filemap_get_folios_tag()")
>   d585bdbeb79a ("fs: convert writepage_t callback to pass a folio")
> 
> from the mm-stable tree.
> 
> This is a real mess :-(

Doesn't look too bad to me.  Dave's commit is just removing the
functions, so it doesn't matter how they're being changed.

The real question in my mind is why for-next is being updated two days
before the merge window with new patches.  What's the point in -next
if patches are being added at this late point?