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: <20230616115856.3ce7682c@canb.auug.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <20230616115856.3ce7682c@canb.auug.org.au>
From:   Vishal Moola <vishal.moola@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Jun 2023 12:44:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOzc2pxi1AH0Zmm_E=scqyO=Aemd3jeRje8tpsWhJ+5T3E7C5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the mm tree
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 6:59=E2=80=AFPM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org=
.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
>
>   mm/gup.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   0f3f569eca46 ("mm/gup.c: reorganize try_get_folio()")
>
> from the mm tree and commit:
>
>   c8070b787519 ("mm: Don't pin ZERO_PAGE in pin_user_pages()")
>
> from the block tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I think - 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 for fixing these up. I'll keep an eye out for conflicts in
linux-next as well
in the future.