Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the btrfs-kdave tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:31:35 +1000

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the vfs tree got conflicts in:

  fs/btrfs/inode.c
  fs/btrfs/tree-log.c

Commits

  8e5d411c91c1 ("btrfs: simplify btrfs_iget()")
  cfac83868124 ("btrfs: lift make_bad_inode() into btrfs_iget()")
  efa119590db3 ("btrfs: IS_ERR(p) && PTR_ERR(p) == n is a weird way to spell p == ERR_PTR(n)")
  353dd669cc08 ("btrfs: btrfs_iget() never returns an is_bad_inode() inode.")

from the vfs tree are duplicated as commits

  5ee149473042 ("btrfs: simplify btrfs_iget")
  083a7dddaecc ("btrfs: lift make_bad_inode into btrfs_iget")
  8bca6b1de61e ("btrfs: simplify IS_ERR/PTR_ERR checks")
  7ffab8b69edc ("btrfs: btrfs_iget never returns an is_bad_inode inode")

in the btrfs-kdave tree :-( (except 5ee149473042 has an extra comment
and efa119590db3 has na extra space)

I fixed it up (the obvious way) 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