linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: block/blk-settings.c between commit: 9bb33f24abbd ("block: refactor the bounce buffering code") from the block tree and commit: 1d4982a2dc66 ("include: remove pagemap.h from blkdev.h") from the akpm-current

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On 3/18/21 11:54 AM, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 11:17 PM Stephen Rothwell > wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: >> >> mm/memcontrol.c >> >> between commit: >> >> 06d69d4c8669 ("mm: Charge active memcg when no mm

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 11:17 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: > > mm/memcontrol.c > > between commit: > > 06d69d4c8669 ("mm: Charge active memcg when no mm is set") > > from the block tree and commit: > >

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: mm/memcontrol.c between commit: 06d69d4c8669 ("mm: Charge active memcg when no mm is set") from the block tree and commit: 674788258a66 ("memcg: charge before adding to swapcache on swapin") from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: mm/filemap.c between commit: 0abed7c69b95 ("mm: never attempt async page lock if we've transferred data already") from the block tree and commit: b5c7e73f6bd3 ("mm/filemap/c: break generic_file_buffered_read

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: mm/readahead.c between commit: fd0ec96ec35d ("readahead: use limited read-ahead to satisfy read") from the block tree and commits: 16681dc9dd92 ("mm/readahead: pass readahead_control to force_page_cache_ra")

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: mm/page-writeback.c between commit: 1cb039f3dc16 ("bdi: replace BDI_CAP_STABLE_WRITES with a queue and a sb flag") from the block tree and commit: 7a3714df632a ("mm/page-writeback: support tail pages in

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 5:10 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: > > fs/sync.c > > between commit: > > 22f96b3808c1 ("fs: add sync_file_range() helper") > > from the block tree and commit: > > 9a8d18789a18

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: fs/sync.c between commit: 22f96b3808c1 ("fs: add sync_file_range() helper") from the block tree and commit: 9a8d18789a18 ("fs/sync.c: sync_file_range(2) may use WB_SYNC_ALL writeback") from the akpm-current

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: block/blk-iolatency.c between commit: 1fa2840e56f9 ("blk-iolatency: use a percentile approache for ssd's") from the block tree and commit: 07360251b445

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: block/blk-iolatency.c between commit: 1fa2840e56f9 ("blk-iolatency: use a percentile approache for ssd's") from the block tree and commit: 07360251b445

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got conflicts in: drivers/md/bcache/Kconfig drivers/md/bcache/util.h between commits: bc81b47e828a ("bcache: prefer 'help' in Kconfig") fc2d5988b597 ("bcache: add identifier names to arguments of function definitions") from

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got conflicts in: drivers/md/bcache/Kconfig drivers/md/bcache/util.h between commits: bc81b47e828a ("bcache: prefer 'help' in Kconfig") fc2d5988b597 ("bcache: add identifier names to arguments of function definitions") from

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: kernel/fork.c between commit: 2c323017e381 ("blk-cgroup: clear the throttle queue on fork") from the block tree and commit: f3ed47469a7b ("fs: fsnotify: account fsnotify metadata to kmemcg") from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: kernel/fork.c between commit: 2c323017e381 ("blk-cgroup: clear the throttle queue on fork") from the block tree and commit: f3ed47469a7b ("fs: fsnotify: account fsnotify metadata to kmemcg") from the

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h between commit: 233bde21aa43 ("block: Move SECTOR_SIZE and SECTOR_SHIFT definitions into ") from the block tree and commit: 5d95e0f3a22b ("zram: drop max_zpage_size and use

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h between commit: 233bde21aa43 ("block: Move SECTOR_SIZE and SECTOR_SHIFT definitions into ") from the block tree and commit: 5d95e0f3a22b ("zram: drop max_zpage_size and use

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On 07/12/2016 11:14 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: drivers/nvme/host/core.c between commit: f80ec966c19b ("nvme: Limit command retries") from the block tree and commit: 8cc07e463b0c ("NVMe: don't allocate

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On 07/12/2016 11:14 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: drivers/nvme/host/core.c between commit: f80ec966c19b ("nvme: Limit command retries") from the block tree and commit: 8cc07e463b0c ("NVMe: don't allocate

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: drivers/nvme/host/core.c between commit: f80ec966c19b ("nvme: Limit command retries") from the block tree and commit: 8cc07e463b0c ("NVMe: don't allocate unused nvme_major") from the akpm-current tree. I

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: drivers/nvme/host/core.c between commit: f80ec966c19b ("nvme: Limit command retries") from the block tree and commit: 8cc07e463b0c ("NVMe: don't allocate unused nvme_major") from the akpm-current tree. I

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 11:44:31 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 19:12:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell > wrote: > > > --- a/fs/block_dev.c > > +++ b/fs/block_dev.c > > @@@ -432,7 -432,7 +432,7 @@@ int bdev_write_page(struct block_devic > > > > if (!ops->rw_page ||

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 19:12:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > --- a/fs/block_dev.c > +++ b/fs/block_dev.c > @@@ -432,7 -432,7 +432,7 @@@ int bdev_write_page(struct block_devic > > if (!ops->rw_page || bdev_get_integrity(bdev)) > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > - result =

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: fs/block_dev.c between commit: 6f3b0e8bcf3c ("blk-mq: add a flags parameter to blk_mq_alloc_request") from the block tree and commit: f39b774555f0 ("fs/block_dev.c:bdev_write_page(): use

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: fs/block_dev.c between commit: 6f3b0e8bcf3c ("blk-mq: add a flags parameter to blk_mq_alloc_request") from the block tree and commit: f39b774555f0 ("fs/block_dev.c:bdev_write_page(): use

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 19:12:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > --- a/fs/block_dev.c > +++ b/fs/block_dev.c > @@@ -432,7 -432,7 +432,7 @@@ int bdev_write_page(struct block_devic > > if (!ops->rw_page || bdev_get_integrity(bdev)) > return -EOPNOTSUPP; >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 11:44:31 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 19:12:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell > wrote: > > > --- a/fs/block_dev.c > > +++ b/fs/block_dev.c > > @@@ -432,7 -432,7 +432,7 @@@ int bdev_write_page(struct

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Mel, On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 18:38:53 + Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 02:51:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > @@ -2038,7 +2038,7 @@ void generic_make_request(struct bio *bio) > > do { > > struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev); > >

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 02:51:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: > > block/blk-mq.c > > between commit: > > 3ef28e83ab15 ("block: generic request_queue reference counting") > > from the block tree and

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Stephen, [auto build test WARNING on block/for-next -- if it's inappropriate base, please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Stephen-Rothwell/linux-next-manual-merge-of-the-akpm-current-tree-with-the-block-tree/20151101

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Stephen, [auto build test ERROR on block/for-next -- if it's inappropriate base, please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Stephen-Rothwell/linux-next-manual-merge-of-the-akpm-current-tree-with-the-block-tree/20151101-235406

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: block/blk-mq.c between commit: 3ef28e83ab15 ("block: generic request_queue reference counting") from the block tree and commit: 7cc8e61bde7a ("mm, page_alloc: distinguish between being unable to sleep,

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: block/blk-mq.c between commit: 3ef28e83ab15 ("block: generic request_queue reference counting") from the block tree and commit: 7cc8e61bde7a ("mm, page_alloc: distinguish between being unable to sleep,

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Stephen, [auto build test WARNING on block/for-next -- if it's inappropriate base, please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Stephen-Rothwell/linux-next-manual-merge-of-the-akpm-current-tree-with-the-block-tree/20151101

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Stephen, [auto build test ERROR on block/for-next -- if it's inappropriate base, please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Stephen-Rothwell/linux-next-manual-merge-of-the-akpm-current-tree-with-the-block-tree/20151101-235406

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Mel, On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 18:38:53 + Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 02:51:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > @@ -2038,7 +2038,7 @@ void generic_make_request(struct bio *bio) > > do { > > struct request_queue *q =

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 02:51:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in: > > block/blk-mq.c > > between commit: > > 3ef28e83ab15 ("block: generic request_queue reference counting") > > from the block tree and

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got conflicts in mm/filemap.c and mm/truncate.c between commit de1414a654e6 ("fs: export inode_to_bdi and use it in favor of mapping->backing_dev_info") from the tree and commit d475bc581640 ("page_writeback: cleanup mess around

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got conflicts in mm/filemap.c and mm/truncate.c between commit de1414a654e6 (fs: export inode_to_bdi and use it in favor of mapping-backing_dev_info) from the tree and commit d475bc581640 (page_writeback: cleanup mess around

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in block/bio.c between commit 254c4407cb84 ("bio: modify __bio_add_page() to accept pages that don't start a new segment") from the block tree and commit b5e51c564fb2 ("bio: modify __bio_add_page() to accept pages that

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in block/bio.c between commit 254c4407cb84 (bio: modify __bio_add_page() to accept pages that don't start a new segment) from the block tree and commit b5e51c564fb2 (bio: modify __bio_add_page() to accept pages that don't

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in mm/bounce.c between commit 5d1f127c3e0c ("block: Convert bio_for_each_segment() to bvec_iter") from the block tree and commit df5494a36263 ("kthread: make kthread_create() killable") from the akpm-current tree. I

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in fs/bio-integrity.c between commits ed2d2f9a8265 ("block: Abstract out bvec iterator") and 5d1f127c3e0c ("block: Convert bio_for_each_segment() to bvec_iter") from the block tree and commit 6952c5b3b2b7

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in fs/bio-integrity.c between commits ed2d2f9a8265 (block: Abstract out bvec iterator) and 5d1f127c3e0c (block: Convert bio_for_each_segment() to bvec_iter) from the block tree and commit 6952c5b3b2b7 (fs/bio-integrity.c:

linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree

Hi Andrew, Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in mm/bounce.c between commit 5d1f127c3e0c (block: Convert bio_for_each_segment() to bvec_iter) from the block tree and commit df5494a36263 (kthread: make kthread_create() killable) from the akpm-current tree. I fixed it