[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070522013424.3870ead3@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 01:34:24 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...nel.org, Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, jeff@...zik.org,
Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>,
Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 07/69] libata-sff: Undo bug introduced with pci_iomap
changes
On Mon, 21 May 2007 16:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 21 May 2007, Chris Wright wrote:
> > ---
> > [chrisw: Why is this not upstream yet?]
>
> And equally importantly, why is it even in the stable queue if it's not
> upstream.
Its not relevant to upstream - upstream has different updates which
removed the bug but not in a clean "backport this" way.
> It's against stable rules, and it means that we may have stuff that gets
> fixed in -stable and not in -upstream, if people don't notice. THAT IS
> BAD
Then the rules are stupid in this specific case.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists