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

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:32:49 +1100

Hi all,

On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 14:49:55 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the block tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/bcachefs/move.c
> 
> between commits:
> 
>   6a967d3330d9 ("bcachefs: data_update now embeds bch_read_bio")
>   b4edf03721c3 ("bcachefs: cleanup redundant code around data_update_op initialization")
> 
> from the bcachefs tree and commit:
> 
>   19206d3f5ef7 ("block: Delete bio_set_prio()")
> 
> from the block tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see bottom and the folloing merge resolution patch) 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.
> 
> From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 14:45:32 +1100
> Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "block: Delete bio_set_prio()"
> 
> interacting with commits
> 
>   6a967d3330d9 ("bcachefs: data_update now embeds bch_read_bio")
>   b4edf03721c3 ("bcachefs: cleanup redundant code around data_update_op initialization")
> 
> from the bcachefs tree.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
> ---
>  fs/bcachefs/data_update.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/data_update.c b/fs/bcachefs/data_update.c
> index e11d05a4b31e..19b1668c53c0 100644
> --- a/fs/bcachefs/data_update.c
> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/data_update.c
> @@ -818,7 +818,7 @@ int bch2_data_update_init(struct btree_trans *trans,
>  	m->rbio.bio.bi_iter.bi_size	= buf_bytes;
>  	m->rbio.bio.bi_iter.bi_sector	= bkey_start_offset(k.k);
>  
> -	bio_set_prio(&m->op.wbio.bio, IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(IOPRIO_CLASS_IDLE, 0));
> +	m->op.wbio.bio.bi_ioprio = IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(IOPRIO_CLASS_IDLE, 0);
>  
>  	return 0;
>  enomem:
> -- 
> 2.45.2
> 
> diff --cc fs/bcachefs/move.c
> index 0f60025a9532,67fb651f4af4..000000000000
> --- a/fs/bcachefs/move.c
> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/move.c
> @@@ -287,10 -294,26 +287,10 @@@ int bch2_move_extent(struct moving_cont
>   	ret = bch2_data_update_init(trans, iter, ctxt, &io->write, ctxt->wp,
>   				    io_opts, data_opts, iter->btree_id, k);
>   	if (ret)
>  -		goto err_free_pages;
>  +		goto err_free;
>  +
>  +	io->write.rbio.bio.bi_end_io = move_read_endio;
> - 	bio_set_prio(&io->write.rbio.bio, IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(IOPRIO_CLASS_IDLE, 0));
> ++	io->write.rbio.bio.bi_ioprio = IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE(IOPRIO_CLASS_IDLE, 0);
>   
>   	io->write.op.end_io = move_write_done;
>   

This is now a conflict between the bcachefs tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell