linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the btrfs tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

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

  fs/btrfs/ioctl.c

between commit:

  2911da32d543 ("btrfs: use btrfs_inode_lock/btrfs_inode_unlock inode lock helpers")

from the btrfs tree and commit:

  d9b32b140987 ("btrfs: convert to fileattr")

from the vfs tree.

I fixed it up (I used the vfs tree version (which removed inode_lock()
in various places) 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

Attachment: pgpm7V0C2Ljgc.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature