linux-next: manual merge of the infiniband tree with the vfs tree
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: [PATCH] SELinux: Make selinux_kernel_create_files_as() shouldn't just always return 0
Next: [PATCH] readahead: add notes on readahead size
From: Stephen Rothwell on 25 Feb 2010 21:10 Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the infiniband tree got a conflict in drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c between commit ce916e2b935f8b3402da1457ff23b9f9f786c09b ("switch infiniband uverbs to anon_inodes") from the vfs tree and commit 4169c4a9735d6434c9e39fa81ae5517e3afd4cd8 ("IB/uverbs: Use anon_inodes instead of private infinibandeventfs") from the infiniband tree. These two commits purport to do something similar. Someone should look at them both and decide which one is right. For now I have used the version from the vfs tree - with the addition of the part from the infiniband tree version that selects ANON_INODES in the Kconfig file. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr(a)canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
From: Roland Dreier on 26 Feb 2010 17:10
> Today's linux-next merge of the infiniband tree got a conflict in > drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_main.c between commit > ce916e2b935f8b3402da1457ff23b9f9f786c09b ("switch infiniband uverbs to > anon_inodes") from the vfs tree and commit > 4169c4a9735d6434c9e39fa81ae5517e3afd4cd8 ("IB/uverbs: Use anon_inodes > instead of private infinibandeventfs") from the infiniband tree. > > These two commits purport to do something similar. Someone should look > at them both and decide which one is right. For now I have used the > version from the vfs tree - with the addition of the part from the > infiniband tree version that selects ANON_INODES in the Kconfig file. Huh, I didn't see that vfs commit and as far as I can tell it was never posted anywhere. Which I guess is why we have linux-next :) Anyway, both commits look essentially equivalent -- Al's moves the fd allocation to callers, which is OK with me (a bit of duplicated code but maybe a bit better layering of functions). I would like to see the Kconfig part go in as part of the patch, although I guess it's not such a terrible bit of breakage to fix up a bit after the fact. (Not a real bisection killer) Al, let me know what you want to do -- I can pick up your patch or drop the patch from my tree, either way is fine. - R. -- Roland Dreier <rolandd(a)cisco.com> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |