Re: linux-next: manual merge of the btrfs tree with the fscache tree
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Date: 2021-02-12 01:11:44
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 10:38:10AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the btrfs tree got a conflict in:
lib/iov_iter.c
between commit:
11432a3cc061 ("iov_iter: Add ITER_XARRAY")
from the fscache tree and commit:
325a835476e3 ("iov_iter: Remove memzero_page() in favor of zero_user()")I don't seem to have that commit after fetching linux-next? Should I have it? This is where I fetched from. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git After doing that I don't see the zero_user() as below. All that said the resolution below seems correct. Ira
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
from the btrfs 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 lib/iov_iter.c index 24413884b5ca,aa0d03b33a1e..000000000000--- a/lib/iov_iter.c +++ b/lib/iov_iter.c@@@ -1048,9 -961,8 +1028,9 @@@ size_t iov_iter_zero(size_t bytes, stru return pipe_zero(bytes, i); iterate_and_advance(i, bytes, v, clear_user(v.iov_base, v.iov_len), - memzero_page(v.bv_page, v.bv_offset, v.bv_len), + zero_user(v.bv_page, v.bv_offset, v.bv_len), - memset(v.iov_base, 0, v.iov_len) + memset(v.iov_base, 0, v.iov_len), - memzero_page(v.bv_page, v.bv_offset, v.bv_len) ++ zero_user(v.bv_page, v.bv_offset, v.bv_len) ) return bytes;