Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the bcachefs tree with the mm tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 10:50:24 +1000

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the fs-next tree got a conflict in:

  fs/bcachefs/fs.c

between commit:

  3346ada04cf5 ("bcachefs: do not use PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM")

from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:

  082330c36194 ("bcachefs: allocate inode by using alloc_inode_sb()")

from the bcachefs 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/bcachefs/fs.c
index a7c5570c4084,fd6ac91c9b75..000000000000
--- a/fs/bcachefs/fs.c
+++ b/fs/bcachefs/fs.c
@@@ -239,9 -283,10 +283,10 @@@ static struct inode *bch2_alloc_inode(s
  	BUG();
  }
  
 -static struct bch_inode_info *__bch2_new_inode(struct bch_fs *c)
 +static struct bch_inode_info *__bch2_new_inode(struct bch_fs *c, gfp_t gfp)
  {
- 	struct bch_inode_info *inode = kmem_cache_alloc(bch2_inode_cache, gfp);
+ 	struct bch_inode_info *inode = alloc_inode_sb(c->vfs_sb,
 -						bch2_inode_cache, GFP_NOFS);
++						bch2_inode_cache, gfp);
  	if (!inode)
  		return NULL;