From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel•dk>, David Sterba <dsterba@suse•cz>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm•org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst•de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger•kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the btrfs tree
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 13:25:35 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220715132535.36121f59@canb.auug.org.au> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3429 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got conflicts in:
fs/btrfs/compression.c
fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
fs/btrfs/raid56.c
between commits:
7c16aa15d58b ("btrfs: simplify the pending I/O counting in struct compressed_bio")
50d003d4254c ("btrfs: centralize setting REQ_META")
9fab7af28df7 ("btrfs: raid56: use fixed stripe length everywhere")
from the btrfs tree and commit:
bf9486d6dd23 ("fs/btrfs: Use the enum req_op and blk_opf_t types")
from the block 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 fs/btrfs/compression.c
index b6fb8b0682ba,a82b9f17f476..000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/compression.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/compression.c
@@@ -394,10 -514,10 +394,10 @@@ blk_status_t btrfs_submit_compressed_wr
struct compressed_bio *cb;
u64 cur_disk_bytenr = disk_start;
u64 next_stripe_start;
- blk_status_t ret;
int skip_sum = inode->flags & BTRFS_INODE_NODATASUM;
const bool use_append = btrfs_use_zone_append(inode, disk_start);
- const unsigned int bio_op = use_append ? REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND : REQ_OP_WRITE;
+ const enum req_op bio_op = use_append ? REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND : REQ_OP_WRITE;
+ blk_status_t ret = BLK_STS_OK;
ASSERT(IS_ALIGNED(start, fs_info->sectorsize) &&
IS_ALIGNED(len, fs_info->sectorsize));
diff --cc fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
index db95de608ce3,60a20df353e7..000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c
@@@ -4531,7 -4575,7 +4531,7 @@@ static int write_one_subpage_eb(struct
{
struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = eb->fs_info;
struct page *page = eb->pages[0];
- unsigned int write_flags = wbc_to_write_flags(wbc);
- blk_opf_t write_flags = wbc_to_write_flags(wbc) | REQ_META;
++ blk_opf_t write_flags = wbc_to_write_flags(wbc);
bool no_dirty_ebs = false;
int ret;
@@@ -4576,7 -4620,7 +4576,7 @@@ static noinline_for_stack int write_one
{
u64 disk_bytenr = eb->start;
int i, num_pages;
- unsigned int write_flags = wbc_to_write_flags(wbc);
- blk_opf_t write_flags = wbc_to_write_flags(wbc) | REQ_META;
++ blk_opf_t write_flags = wbc_to_write_flags(wbc);
int ret = 0;
prepare_eb_write(eb);
diff --cc fs/btrfs/raid56.c
index 1afe32d5ab01,c520412d1f86..000000000000
--- a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
@@@ -1018,7 -1135,8 +1018,7 @@@ static int rbio_add_io_sector(struct bt
struct sector_ptr *sector,
unsigned int stripe_nr,
unsigned int sector_nr,
- unsigned int opf)
- unsigned long bio_max_len,
+ enum req_op op)
{
const u32 sectorsize = rbio->bioc->fs_info->sectorsize;
struct bio *last = bio_list->tail;
@@@ -1062,9 -1180,8 +1062,9 @@@
}
/* put a new bio on the list */
- bio = bio_alloc(stripe->dev->bdev, max(bio_max_len >> PAGE_SHIFT, 1UL),
+ bio = bio_alloc(stripe->dev->bdev,
+ max(BTRFS_STRIPE_LEN >> PAGE_SHIFT, 1),
- opf, GFP_NOFS);
+ op, GFP_NOFS);
bio->bi_iter.bi_sector = disk_start >> 9;
bio->bi_private = rbio;
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2022-07-15 3:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-15 3:25 Stephen Rothwell [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-12-21 2:45 linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the btrfs tree Stephen Rothwell
2023-12-21 5:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-02-02 2:45 Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-14 22:17 ` Stephen Rothwell
2020-12-07 2:44 Stephen Rothwell
2020-07-09 2:58 Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-14 2:44 Stephen Rothwell
2015-08-24 4:16 Stephen Rothwell
2015-08-24 4:16 Stephen Rothwell
2015-08-24 4:15 Stephen Rothwell
2015-08-24 4:15 Stephen Rothwell
2014-01-09 4:01 Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220715132535.36121f59@canb.auug.org.au \
--to=sfr@canb$(echo .)auug.org.au \
--cc=axboe@kernel$(echo .)dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm$(echo .)org \
--cc=dsterba@suse$(echo .)cz \
--cc=hch@lst$(echo .)de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox