Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:39:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>
> Are there any comments on this resolution. I just had to do it all
> again due to slight changes in the vfs tree. What are you guys going
> to tell Linus when he comes to merge this?
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:39:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>
> Are there any comments on this resolution. I just had to do it all
> again due to slight changes in the vfs tree. What are you guys going
> to tell Linus when he comes to merge this?
Hi all,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:39:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/proc/inode.c
> fs/proc/root.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
> 83cd45075c36 ("proc:
Hi all,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:39:05 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/proc/inode.c
> fs/proc/root.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
> 83cd45075c36 ("proc:
Hi all,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:44:41 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/proc/internal.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
>
> from the vfs tree and commit:
>
>
Hi all,
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:44:41 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
>
> fs/proc/internal.h
>
> between commit:
>
> 0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
>
> from the vfs tree and commit:
>
>
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
fs/proc/inode.c
fs/proc/root.c
between commit:
0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
83cd45075c36 ("proc: Add fs_context support to procfs")
from the vfs tree and commit:
cc8cda3af2ba
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
fs/proc/inode.c
fs/proc/root.c
between commit:
0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
83cd45075c36 ("proc: Add fs_context support to procfs")
from the vfs tree and commit:
cc8cda3af2ba
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
fs/proc/internal.h
between commit:
0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
from the vfs tree and commit:
04035aa33a12 ("proc: Don't change mount options on remount failure.")
from the
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in:
fs/proc/internal.h
between commit:
0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
from the vfs tree and commit:
04035aa33a12 ("proc: Don't change mount options on remount failure.")
from the
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got conflicts in:
>
> fs/proc/inode.c
> fs/proc/root.c
>
> between commits:
>
> 0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
> 83cd45075c36 ("proc: Add fs_context support to procfs")
>
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got conflicts in:
>
> fs/proc/inode.c
> fs/proc/root.c
>
> between commits:
>
> 0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
> 83cd45075c36 ("proc: Add fs_context support to procfs")
>
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got conflicts in:
fs/proc/inode.c
fs/proc/root.c
between commits:
0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
83cd45075c36 ("proc: Add fs_context support to procfs")
from the vfs tree and commit:
cc8cda3af2ba
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got conflicts in:
fs/proc/inode.c
fs/proc/root.c
between commits:
0223e0999be2 ("procfs: Move proc_fill_super() to fs/proc/root.c")
83cd45075c36 ("proc: Add fs_context support to procfs")
from the vfs tree and commit:
cc8cda3af2ba
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
fs/libfs.c between commit 61ba64fc0768 ("libfs: simple_follow_link()")
from the vfs tree and commit d5044ae07353 ("fs: Add helper functions
for permanently empty directories.") from the userns tree.
I fixed it up (see below)
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
fs/libfs.c between commit 61ba64fc0768 (libfs: simple_follow_link())
from the vfs tree and commit d5044ae07353 (fs: Add helper functions
for permanently empty directories.) from the userns tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi Eric,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
> kernel/user_namespace.c between commits 3c0411846118 ("switch the rest
> of proc_ns_operations to working with &...->ns") and 64964528b24e
> ("make proc_ns_operations work with struct
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
kernel/user_namespace.c between commits 3c0411846118 ("switch the rest
of proc_ns_operations to working with &...->ns") and 64964528b24e
("make proc_ns_operations work with struct ns_common * instead of void
*") from the vfs
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
kernel/user_namespace.c between commits 3c0411846118 (switch the rest
of proc_ns_operations to working with ...-ns) and 64964528b24e
(make proc_ns_operations work with struct ns_common * instead of void
*) from the vfs tree
Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au writes:
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
kernel/user_namespace.c between commits 3c0411846118 (switch the rest
of proc_ns_operations to working with ...-ns) and 64964528b24e
(make proc_ns_operations work with
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
kernel/user_namespace.c between commits 3c0411846118 ("switch the rest
of proc_ns_operations to working with &...->ns") and 64964528b24e
("make proc_ns_operations work with struct ns_common * instead of void
*") from the vfs
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got conflicts in
include/linux/user_namespace.h and kernel/user.c between commit
435d5f4bb2cc ("common object embedded into various struct ns") from
the vfs tree and commit 2b714ea67ed4 ("userns: Add a knob to disable
setgroups on a per
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got conflicts in
include/linux/user_namespace.h and kernel/user.c between commit
435d5f4bb2cc (common object embedded into various struct ns) from
the vfs tree and commit 2b714ea67ed4 (userns: Add a knob to disable
setgroups on a per user
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
kernel/user_namespace.c between commits 3c0411846118 (switch the rest
of proc_ns_operations to working with ...-ns) and 64964528b24e
(make proc_ns_operations work with struct ns_common * instead of void
*) from the vfs tree
Hi Al,
On Fri, 8 Nov 2013 17:50:55 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Al, I do have to wonder why a commit whose whole commit message is:
>
> "RCU'd vfsmounts
>
> _very_ preliminary, barely tested."
>
> is in linux-next as is not being kept over for v3.14 at this point.
Oh, I see, it was
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in fs/mount.h
between commits 84550b9356af ("RCU'd vfsmounts") and 474279dc0f77 ("split
__lookup_mnt() in two functions") from the vfs tree and commit
d7e58b8abc4f ("vfs: Add a function to lazily unmount all mounts from any
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in fs/dcache.c
between commit 84550b9356af ("RCU'd vfsmounts") from the vfs tree and
commit 40216baa0101 ("vfs: Lazily remove mounts on unlinked files and
directories. v2") from the userns tree.
I fixed it up (I think - see
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in fs/namei.c
between commits 45b1139e249d ("namei: minor vfs_unlink cleanup"),
0e22d7c4652b ("locks: break delegations on unlink"), 5d375b9f8afb
("locks: helper functions for delegation breaking") and 909b30216356
("locks: break
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
fs/namespace.c between commit aba809cf0944 ("namespace.c: get rid of
mnt_ghosts") from the vfs tree and commit 484df667efe9 ("vfs: Keep a list
of mounts on a mount point") from the userns tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in
fs/namespace.c between commit aba809cf0944 (namespace.c: get rid of
mnt_ghosts) from the vfs tree and commit 484df667efe9 (vfs: Keep a list
of mounts on a mount point) from the userns tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in fs/namei.c
between commits 45b1139e249d (namei: minor vfs_unlink cleanup),
0e22d7c4652b (locks: break delegations on unlink), 5d375b9f8afb
(locks: helper functions for delegation breaking) and 909b30216356
(locks: break
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in fs/dcache.c
between commit 84550b9356af (RCU'd vfsmounts) from the vfs tree and
commit 40216baa0101 (vfs: Lazily remove mounts on unlinked files and
directories. v2) from the userns tree.
I fixed it up (I think - see below)
Hi Eric,
Today's linux-next merge of the userns tree got a conflict in fs/mount.h
between commits 84550b9356af (RCU'd vfsmounts) and 474279dc0f77 (split
__lookup_mnt() in two functions) from the vfs tree and commit
d7e58b8abc4f (vfs: Add a function to lazily unmount all mounts from any
dentry.
Hi Al,
On Fri, 8 Nov 2013 17:50:55 +1100 Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
wrote:
Al, I do have to wonder why a commit whose whole commit message is:
RCU'd vfsmounts
_very_ preliminary, barely tested.
is in linux-next as is not being kept over for v3.14 at this point.
Oh, I
34 matches
Mail list logo
