Hi all,

On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 09:58:25 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au> 
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs-kdave tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/btrfs/inode.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   58efbc9f5463 ("Btrfs: fix blk_status_t/errno confusion")
> 
> from Linus' tree and commit:
> 
>   e6961cac730f ("btrfs: Move skip checksum check from btrfs_submit_direct to 
> __btrfs_submit_dio_bio")
> 
> from the btrfs-kdave 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.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc fs/btrfs/inode.c
> index 24bcd5cd9cf2,d184a46e46c4..000000000000
> --- a/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/inode.c
> @@@ -7991,10 -8080,9 +8081,10 @@@ static blk_status_t dio_read_error(stru
>       struct extent_io_tree *failure_tree = &BTRFS_I(inode)->io_failure_tree;
>       struct bio *bio;
>       int isector;
> -     int read_mode = 0;
> +     unsigned int read_mode = 0;
>       int segs;
>       int ret;
>  +    blk_status_t status;
>   
>       BUG_ON(bio_op(failed_bio) == REQ_OP_WRITE);
>   
> @@@ -8021,11 -8109,11 +8111,11 @@@
>       bio_set_op_attrs(bio, REQ_OP_READ, read_mode);
>   
>       btrfs_debug(BTRFS_I(inode)->root->fs_info,
> -                 "Repair DIO Read Error: submitting new dio read[%#x] to 
> this_mirror=%d, in_validation=%d\n",
> +                 "repair DIO read error: submitting new dio read[%#x] to 
> this_mirror=%d, in_validation=%d",
>                   read_mode, failrec->this_mirror, failrec->in_validation);
>   
>  -    ret = submit_dio_repair_bio(inode, bio, failrec->this_mirror);
>  -    if (ret) {
>  +    status = submit_dio_repair_bio(inode, bio, failrec->this_mirror);
>  +    if (status) {
>               free_io_failure(failure_tree, io_tree, failrec);
>               bio_put(bio);
>       }
> @@@ -8426,9 -8513,8 +8516,9 @@@ static inline blk_status_t btrfs_lookup
>       return 0;
>   }
>   
>  -static inline int __btrfs_submit_dio_bio(struct bio *bio, struct inode 
> *inode,
>  -                                     u64 file_offset, int async_submit)
>  +static inline blk_status_t
>  +__btrfs_submit_dio_bio(struct bio *bio, struct inode *inode, u64 
> file_offset,
> -                    int skip_sum, int async_submit)
> ++                   int async_submit)
>   {
>       struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = btrfs_sb(inode->i_sb);
>       struct btrfs_dio_private *dip = bio->bi_private;
> @@@ -8541,9 -8625,9 +8630,9 @@@ static int btrfs_submit_direct_hook(str
>                */
>               atomic_inc(&dip->pending_bios);
>   
> -             status = __btrfs_submit_dio_bio(bio, inode, file_offset, 
> skip_sum,
>  -            ret = __btrfs_submit_dio_bio(bio, inode, file_offset,
>  -                                         async_submit);
>  -            if (ret) {
> ++            status = __btrfs_submit_dio_bio(bio, inode, file_offset,
>  +                                            async_submit);
>  +            if (status) {
>                       bio_put(bio);
>                       atomic_dec(&dip->pending_bios);
>                       goto out_err;
> @@@ -8561,9 -8645,8 +8650,8 @@@
>       } while (submit_len > 0);
>   
>   submit:
> -     status = __btrfs_submit_dio_bio(bio, inode, file_offset, skip_sum,
> -                                     async_submit);
>  -    ret = __btrfs_submit_dio_bio(bio, inode, file_offset, async_submit);
>  -    if (!ret)
> ++    status = __btrfs_submit_dio_bio(bio, inode, file_offset, async_submit);
>  +    if (!status)
>               return 0;
>   
>       bio_put(bio);

Just a reminder that this conflict still exists.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Reply via email to