Re: linux-next: manual merge of the folio tree with the btrfs tree

[Filipe Manana]

On 10/05/22 09:39, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the folio tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   fs/btrfs/send.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   d1a1a97304b4 ("btrfs: send: keep the current inode open while processing it")
> 
> from the btrfs tree and commit:
> 
>   2ebdd1df3166 ("mm/readahead: Convert page_cache_async_readahead to take a folio")
> 
> from the folio tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as

Looks correct to me.
Thanks.

> 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.
>