Hi Linus, On Mon, 3 Jul 2017 15:46:00 -0700 Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Martin Schwidefsky > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > please pull from the 'for-linus' branch of > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/s390/linux.git > > for-linus > > So my conflict resolution looks different from the one Stephen posted, > which may be due to various reasons, ranging from "linux-next has > other things that conflict" to just "I didn't notice some semantic > conflict since unlike linux-next I don't build for s390". > > Regardless, you should check my current -git tree just to verify, and > send me a patch if I screwed something up.
At least part of the difference is the following merge fix patch I have been carrying. It is needed due to a build failure. From: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:51:32 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] s390: fix up for "blk-mq: switch ->queue_rq return value to blk_status_t" Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> --- drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c index 42018a20f2b7..0071febac9e6 100644 --- a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c +++ b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c @@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ struct scm_queue { spinlock_t lock; }; -static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, +static blk_status_t scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, const struct blk_mq_queue_data *qd) { struct scm_device *scmdev = hctx->queue->queuedata; @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, spin_lock(&sq->lock); if (!scm_permit_request(bdev, req)) { spin_unlock(&sq->lock); - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY; + return BLK_STS_RESOURCE; } scmrq = sq->scmrq; @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, if (!scmrq) { SCM_LOG(5, "no request"); spin_unlock(&sq->lock); - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY; + return BLK_STS_RESOURCE; } scm_request_init(bdev, scmrq); sq->scmrq = scmrq; @@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, sq->scmrq = NULL; spin_unlock(&sq->lock); - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY; + return BLK_STS_RESOURCE; } blk_mq_start_request(req); @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, sq->scmrq = NULL; } spin_unlock(&sq->lock); - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_OK; + return BLK_STS_OK; } static int scm_blk_init_hctx(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, void *data, -- 2.11.0 -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
