On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 08:14:03PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 16:35:04 +0200 Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>> Applied to the vfs-6.18.iomap branch of the vfs/vfs.git tree. > > >>> Patches in the vfs-6.18.iomap branch should appear in linux-next soon. > > >> > > >> Hmm, AFAIK largest_zero_folio just showed up in mm.git a few days ago. > > >> Wouldn't it be better to queue up this change there? > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Indeed, compiling vfs/vfs.all as of today fails with: > > > > > > fs/iomap/direct-io.c:281:36: error: implicit declaration of function > > > ‘largest_zero_folio’; did you mean ‘is_zero_folio’? [-Wimplicit- > > > function-declaration] > > > > > > Reverting "iomap: use largest_zero_folio() in iomap_dio_zero()" fixes > > > the compilation. > > > > > > > I also got some reports from Stephen in linux-next. As Christoph > > suggested, maybe we drop the patches from Christian's tree and queue it > > up via Andrew's tree > > Thanks, I added it to mm.git. Please ask before you move stuff around between trees. You've complained to me before about this before too. I haven't agreed to that at all. There's a bunch more iomap work coming and this will most certainly not start going through mm trees. So if there's merge conflicts where we rely on a helper that's in mm-next the good thing would simply to provide a branch for us with that helper that we can base this off of.
