linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the gfs2 tree
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: trivial: fix typo s/Defaultd/Defaults/ in EISA documentation
Next: [PATCH 25/40] workqueue: make single thread workqueue shared worker pool friendly
From: Stephen Rothwell on 17 Jan 2010 19:00 Hi Al, Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in fs/gfs2/ops_inode.c between commit 83c77e8b3457f2ee5dad028dc54cf3ce540104b2 ("GFS2: Fix refcnt leak on gfs2_follow_link() error path") from the gfs2 tree and commit 261a144ac2b3867c7be70f08925e446430df6937 ("Switch gfs2 to nd_set_link()") from the vfs tree. I can't figure out if the gfs2 tree fix is required any more, so I just used the vfs tree version. Al, if that gfs2 patch is standalone, you should probably send it to the gfs2 guys. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr(a)canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
From: Steven Whitehouse on 18 Jan 2010 06:00
Hi, On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 10:55 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Al, > > Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got a conflict in > fs/gfs2/ops_inode.c between commit > 83c77e8b3457f2ee5dad028dc54cf3ce540104b2 ("GFS2: Fix refcnt leak on > gfs2_follow_link() error path") from the gfs2 tree and commit > 261a144ac2b3867c7be70f08925e446430df6937 ("Switch gfs2 to nd_set_link()") > from the vfs tree. > > I can't figure out if the gfs2 tree fix is required any more, so I just > used the vfs tree version. > > Al, if that gfs2 patch is standalone, you should probably send it to the > gfs2 guys. > It looks as if the two patches would be alternatives. The only question is whether Al's patch should be left for the merge window or whether its ok to send it ahead of time to fix the issue (which is what I had been intending to do with the bug fix prior to Al's patch). Thoughts? Steve. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |