Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 19:05:09 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
        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: <20230220190509.06e9a3cb@canb.auug.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <Y/ON+ugfcFBdeZ4i@casper.infradead.org>
References: <Y/N8hVWeR3AjssUC@casper.infradead.org>
        <20230220152933.1ab8fa4a@canb.auug.org.au>
        <1676391.1676903381@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
        <Y/ON+ugfcFBdeZ4i@casper.infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/3TCpOURP6L_/Swc0Tm5qjLy";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Precedence: bulk

--Sig_/3TCpOURP6L_/Swc0Tm5qjLy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Matthew,

On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 15:12:58 +0000 Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wro=
te:
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 02:29:41PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> > Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> >  =20
> > > 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.
> > >=20
> > > 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? =20
> >=20
> > It's more of a transfer of a subset of my iov/splice patches from the
> > linux-block tree to the cifs tree.  I thought Jens would've dropped my =
branch
> > from his tree for the moment. =20
>=20
> Your iov/splice patches don't conflict.  The part that you snipped says
> it's c8859bc0c129 ("cifs: Remove unused code")

That is just the immediate conflict. See my other reply.

--=20
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

--Sig_/3TCpOURP6L_/Swc0Tm5qjLy
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmPzKbUACgkQAVBC80lX
0Gx2Lgf/UklYtwpTkibZrdi2GXNRjV4CPSeWRUgBw2f7YTVudivI04tHFO3/nXOi
WmRkLZ6zKfJjtEzR8dyPe8DrcUk8u4CybWe4m3PVpm5yFg+rhtNRfzIwHKbLxOZ/
i65foCtqRO57V/ZbphgzqxeeUy6shSc7N1Xo4HFlUqJbyCvAPoO05DH8szcg+nQV
z1tVRzTYZiHc+PC9ugjEmkboMLYBvwP5iLjrc46PsjBXDzDtPBWHRks0Yl/PIokh
6pK0IMx7uF3KkSryeGauUOs9tLTrmPqLjJzX5viCVf9BWHELv4MRuDTjipk4yKL9
nEgxY3aWjNb0aEhkeOm59AhRsSDRCA==
=YeX2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Sig_/3TCpOURP6L_/Swc0Tm5qjLy--