Hi all,

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

  include/linux/huge_mm.h

between commit:

  bc47772ebe8b ("mm: introduce a pageflag for partially mapped folios")

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

  fd031210c9ce ("mm: split a folio in minimum folio order chunks")

from the vfs-brauner 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 include/linux/huge_mm.h
index 0b0539f4ee1a,7c50aeed0522..000000000000
--- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
@@@ -326,14 -316,15 +328,15 @@@ unsigned long thp_get_unmapped_area_vmf
  		unsigned long len, unsigned long pgoff, unsigned long flags,
  		vm_flags_t vm_flags);
  
 -bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int *pextra_pins);
 +bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int caller_pins, int *pextra_pins);
  int split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
  		unsigned int new_order);
+ int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *list);
  static inline int split_huge_page(struct page *page)
  {
- 	return split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(page, NULL, 0);
+ 	return split_folio(page_folio(page));
  }
 -void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio);
 +void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio, bool partially_mapped);
  
  void __split_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
  		unsigned long address, bool freeze, struct folio *folio);
@@@ -502,7 -487,13 +505,13 @@@ static inline int split_huge_page(struc
  {
  	return 0;
  }
+ 
+ static inline int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *list)
+ {
+ 	return 0;
+ }
+ 
 -static inline void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio) {}
 +static inline void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio, bool partially_mapped) {}
  #define split_huge_pmd(__vma, __pmd, __address)	\
  	do { } while (0)
  

Hi all,

On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 11:21:01 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the fs-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/linux/huge_mm.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   bc47772ebe8b ("mm: introduce a pageflag for partially mapped folios")
> 
> from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:
> 
>   fd031210c9ce ("mm: split a folio in minimum folio order chunks")
> 
> from the vfs-brauner 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 include/linux/huge_mm.h
> index 0b0539f4ee1a,7c50aeed0522..000000000000
> --- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
> @@@ -326,14 -316,15 +328,15 @@@ unsigned long thp_get_unmapped_area_vmf
>   		unsigned long len, unsigned long pgoff, unsigned long flags,
>   		vm_flags_t vm_flags);
>   
>  -bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int *pextra_pins);
>  +bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int caller_pins, int *pextra_pins);
>   int split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
>   		unsigned int new_order);
> + int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *list);
>   static inline int split_huge_page(struct page *page)
>   {
> - 	return split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(page, NULL, 0);
> + 	return split_folio(page_folio(page));
>   }
>  -void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio);
>  +void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio, bool partially_mapped);
>   
>   void __split_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
>   		unsigned long address, bool freeze, struct folio *folio);
> @@@ -502,7 -487,13 +505,13 @@@ static inline int split_huge_page(struc
>   {
>   	return 0;
>   }
> + 
> + static inline int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *list)
> + {
> + 	return 0;
> + }
> + 
>  -static inline void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio) {}
>  +static inline void deferred_split_folio(struct folio *folio, bool partially_mapped) {}
>   #define split_huge_pmd(__vma, __pmd, __address)	\
>   	do { } while (0)
>   

This is now a conflict between the vfs-brauner tree and the mm-stable
tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 11:21:01AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the fs-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   include/linux/huge_mm.h
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   bc47772ebe8b ("mm: introduce a pageflag for partially mapped folios")
> 
> from the mm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:
> 
>   fd031210c9ce ("mm: split a folio in minimum folio order chunks")
> 
> from the vfs-brauner 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.

Thanks Stephen.

The changes look good to me.

There is also another fix in this commit that I will be sending out very
soon.

@Christian and @Stephen:

I see that fs-next still does not have the mm-unstable changes. When I
send the fix, should I base it on:

- vfs.blocksize branch from Christian?

or

- linux-next which has latest mm changes?

--
Pankaj