lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20071024205723.458fab97.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:57:23 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: trenn@...e.de Cc: linux-acpi <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Detect hwmon and i2c bus drivers interfering with ACPI Operation Region resources On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:31:59 +0200 Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de> wrote: > it seems Len's test tree and Linus tree diverged a bit, at least with > this patch set things do not apply cleanly. > > Therefore I post these for discussion whether and in which kernel tree > they should end up before doing work for nothing. > If they are still a candidate for 2.6.24 (rather unintrusive), pls tell > me whether and when I should base them against Len's test/release branch > or whatever other tree. > If not, it would be great if they can be included into the -mm tree and > I can rebase them against this one. I staged the three acpi patches against Len's tree and I staged the hwmon patch against Mark's tree and I staged the I2C patch against Jean's tree. This means that if/when the ACPI patches have gone me->Len->Linus, I can send the I2C patch to Jean and the hwmon patch to Mark and we're all good. - 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