linux-next: manual merge of the vfs-brauner tree with the ext3 tree

[Mark Brown]

Hi all,

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

  fs/ext2/xattr.c

between commit:

  6abf69e2e7f91 ("ext2: Simplify error handling of IO error when adding xattr")

from the ext3 tree and commit:

  356984d1a5c32 ("ext2: Fix lost inode updates for IS_SYNC inodes")

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/ext2/xattr.c
index 5f49ec4afc36f,be63f89402a38..0000000000000
--- a/fs/ext2/xattr.c
+++ b/fs/ext2/xattr.c
@@@ -777,16 -777,20 +777,16 @@@ ext2_xattr_set2(struct inode *inode, st
  	/* Update the inode. */
  	EXT2_I(inode)->i_file_acl = new_bh ? new_bh->b_blocknr : 0;
  	inode_set_ctime_current(inode);
+ 	mark_inode_dirty(inode);
  	if (IS_SYNC(inode)) {
  		error = sync_inode_metadata(inode, 1);
 -		/* In case sync failed due to ENOSPC the inode was actually
 -		 * written (only some dirty data were not) so we just proceed
 -		 * as if nothing happened and cleanup the unused block */
 -		if (error && error != -ENOSPC) {
 -			if (new_bh && new_bh != old_bh) {
 -				dquot_free_block_nodirty(inode, 1);
 -				mark_inode_dirty(inode);
 -			}
 +		/*
 +		 * Inode writeout failed. Backing everything out is complex so
 +		 * let's just leave it for e2fsck to cleanup the mess.
 +		 */
 +		if (error)
  			goto cleanup;
- 	} else
- 		mark_inode_dirty(inode);
 -		}
+ 	}
  
  	error = 0;
  	if (old_bh && old_bh != new_bh) {

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature