Hi all,

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

  fs/9p/vfs_addr.c

between commit:

  0c31679cf2c0 ("netfs: Add a netfs inode context")

from the fscache tree and commit:

  09f7fc259e5d ("fscache: Convert fscache_set_page_dirty() to fscache_dirty_folio()")

from the folio 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/9p/vfs_addr.c
index ed06f3c34e98,76956c9d2af9..000000000000
--- a/fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
+++ b/fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
@@@ -353,9 -370,9 +336,9 @@@ static bool v9fs_dirty_folio(struct add
  #endif
  
  const struct address_space_operations v9fs_addr_operations = {
 -	.readpage = v9fs_vfs_readpage,
 -	.readahead = v9fs_vfs_readahead,
 +	.readpage = netfs_readpage,
 +	.readahead = netfs_readahead,
- 	.set_page_dirty = v9fs_set_page_dirty,
+ 	.dirty_folio = v9fs_dirty_folio,
  	.writepage = v9fs_vfs_writepage,
  	.write_begin = v9fs_write_begin,
  	.write_end = v9fs_write_end,

Hi all,

On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 20:25:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the folio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   0c31679cf2c0 ("netfs: Add a netfs inode context")
> 
> from the fscache tree and commit:
> 
>   09f7fc259e5d ("fscache: Convert fscache_set_page_dirty() to fscache_dirty_folio()")
> 
> from the folio 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.
> 
> 
> diff --cc fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> index ed06f3c34e98,76956c9d2af9..000000000000
> --- a/fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> @@@ -353,9 -370,9 +336,9 @@@ static bool v9fs_dirty_folio(struct add
>   #endif
>   
>   const struct address_space_operations v9fs_addr_operations = {
>  -	.readpage = v9fs_vfs_readpage,
>  -	.readahead = v9fs_vfs_readahead,
>  +	.readpage = netfs_readpage,
>  +	.readahead = netfs_readahead,
> - 	.set_page_dirty = v9fs_set_page_dirty,
> + 	.dirty_folio = v9fs_dirty_folio,
>   	.writepage = v9fs_vfs_writepage,
>   	.write_begin = v9fs_write_begin,
>   	.write_end = v9fs_write_end,

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

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell