Hi all,

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

  fs/ext4/fsync.c

between commit:

  3a0fb9e5017077 ("ext4: fix fsync(2) for nojournal mode")

from the ext4 tree and commit:

  41189b49bcf1c2 ("ext4: Track metadata bhs in fs-private inode part")

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 fs/ext4/fsync.c
index bd8f230fa507e7,aa80af2b4eea28..00000000000000
--- a/fs/ext4/fsync.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/fsync.c
@@@ -83,23 -83,12 +83,24 @@@ static int ext4_fsync_nojournal(struct 
  				int datasync, bool *needs_barrier)
  {
  	struct inode *inode = file->f_inode;
 +	struct writeback_control wbc = {
 +		.sync_mode = WB_SYNC_ALL,
 +		.nr_to_write = 0,
 +	};
  	int ret;
  
- 	ret = generic_buffers_fsync_noflush(file, start, end, datasync);
+ 	ret = mmb_fsync_noflush(file, &EXT4_I(inode)->i_metadata_bhs,
+ 				start, end, datasync);
 -	if (!ret)
 -		ret = ext4_sync_parent(inode);
 +	if (ret)
 +		return ret;
 +
 +	/* Force writeout of inode table buffer to disk */
 +	ret = ext4_write_inode(inode, &wbc);
 +	if (ret)
 +		return ret;
 +
 +	ret = ext4_sync_parent(inode);
 +
  	if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, BARRIER))
  		*needs_barrier = true;
  

On Fri 27-03-26 17:38:30, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the vfs-brauner tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/ext4/fsync.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   3a0fb9e5017077 ("ext4: fix fsync(2) for nojournal mode")
> 
> from the ext4 tree and commit:
> 
>   41189b49bcf1c2 ("ext4: Track metadata bhs in fs-private inode part")
> 
> 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.

The resolution looks good. Thanks!

								Honza

> 
> diff --cc fs/ext4/fsync.c
> index bd8f230fa507e7,aa80af2b4eea28..00000000000000
> --- a/fs/ext4/fsync.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/fsync.c
> @@@ -83,23 -83,12 +83,24 @@@ static int ext4_fsync_nojournal(struct 
>   				int datasync, bool *needs_barrier)
>   {
>   	struct inode *inode = file->f_inode;
>  +	struct writeback_control wbc = {
>  +		.sync_mode = WB_SYNC_ALL,
>  +		.nr_to_write = 0,
>  +	};
>   	int ret;
>   
> - 	ret = generic_buffers_fsync_noflush(file, start, end, datasync);
> + 	ret = mmb_fsync_noflush(file, &EXT4_I(inode)->i_metadata_bhs,
> + 				start, end, datasync);
>  -	if (!ret)
>  -		ret = ext4_sync_parent(inode);
>  +	if (ret)
>  +		return ret;
>  +
>  +	/* Force writeout of inode table buffer to disk */
>  +	ret = ext4_write_inode(inode, &wbc);
>  +	if (ret)
>  +		return ret;
>  +
>  +	ret = ext4_sync_parent(inode);
>  +
>   	if (test_opt(inode->i_sb, BARRIER))
>   		*needs_barrier = true;
>   


-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR