* linux-next: manual merge of the libata tree with the block tree
@ 2016-11-08 5:58 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2016-11-08 5:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tejun Heo, Jens Axboe
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Adam Manzanares, Christoph Hellwig
Hi Tejun,
Today's linux-next merge of the libata tree got a conflict in:
block/blk-core.c
between commits:
e806402130c9 ("block: split out request-only flags into a new namespace")
ef295ecf090d ("block: better op and flags encoding")
from the block tree and commit:
5dc8b362a237 ("block: Add iocontext priority to request")
from the libata 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
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@@ -1152,11 -1153,11 +1152,12 @@@ static struct request *__get_request(st
blk_rq_init(q, rq);
blk_rq_set_rl(rq, rl);
+ blk_rq_set_prio(rq, ioc);
- req_set_op_attrs(rq, op, op_flags | REQ_ALLOCED);
+ rq->cmd_flags = op;
+ rq->rq_flags = rq_flags;
/* init elvpriv */
- if (op_flags & REQ_ELVPRIV) {
+ if (rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV) {
if (unlikely(et->icq_cache && !icq)) {
if (ioc)
icq = ioc_create_icq(ioc, q, gfp_mask);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2016-11-08 5:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-11-08 5:58 linux-next: manual merge of the libata tree with the block tree Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox