linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 05/22] Staging: hv: Get rid of the forward declaration of blkvsc_init

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6E21E5352C11B742B20C142EB499E0481CCDF9@TK5EX14MBXC126.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date:	Fri, 22 Apr 2011 19:28:33 +0000
From:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
To:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC:	"Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD)" 
	<v-abkane@...rosoft.com>, Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
	"gregkh@...e.de" <gregkh@...e.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"virtualization@...ts.osdl.org" <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 05/22] Staging: hv: Get rid of the forward declaration
	of blkvsc_init_rw()



> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel-bounces@...uxdriverproject.org [mailto:devel-
> bounces@...uxdriverproject.org] On Behalf Of KY Srinivasan
> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 8:41 PM
> To: Greg KH
> Cc: Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD); Haiyang Zhang;
> gregkh@...e.de; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; virtualization@...ts.osdl.org;
> devel@...uxdriverproject.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 05/22] Staging: hv: Get rid of the forward declaration of
> blkvsc_init_rw()
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@...ah.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 4:35 PM
> > To: KY Srinivasan
> > Cc: gregkh@...e.de; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> > devel@...uxdriverproject.org; virtualization@...ts.osdl.org; Haiyang Zhang;
> > Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD)
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/22] Staging: hv: Get rid of the forward declaration of
> > blkvsc_init_rw()
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 02:35:03PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> > > Get rid of the forward declaration of blkvsc_init_rw() by moving the
> > > code around.
> >
> > This patch fails to apply:
> >
> > Applying: Staging: hv: Get rid of the forward declaration of blkvsc_init_rw()
> > error: patch failed: drivers/staging/hv/blkvsc_drv.c:1000
> > error: drivers/staging/hv/blkvsc_drv.c: patch does not apply
> > Patch failed at 0005 Staging: hv: Get rid of the forward declaration of
> > blkvsc_init_rw()
> >
> > So I'll stop at this patch in the series.
> 
> As I look at the git log in today's tree,
> the topmost patch of mine that is applied is:
> 
> Staging: hv: Get rid of blkvsc_check_events()
> 
> This is a patch that is not even in the patch-set that you were currently
> applying. On April 6th, I sent three patch-sets (all these 3 were resends
> after the tree opened):
> 
> 0000-Staging-hv-Cleanup-storage-drivers-phase-II-fixup: This was a two patch
> series to
> fix-up some bugs. This has been applied.
> 
> 0000-Staging-hv-Cleanup-storage-drivers-phase-III: This was a 22 patch-set of
> which you applied 4 patches and the application of the fifth caused a failure
> (as noted by you in this mail).
> 
> 0000-Staging-hv-Cleanup-storage-drivers-phase-IV: This was a 22 patch set
> That should have been applied last.
> 
> For some reason, after you applied 4 patches from the second set,
> looking at the git log, it looks like a patch from the third set was
> applied:
> 
> Subject: [PATCH 01/22]  Staging: hv: Get rid of blkvsc_check_events()
> 
> This is the reason why
> [PATCH 05/22] Staging: hv: Get rid of the forward declaration of blkvsc_init_rw()
> failed to apply. I am curious if I did something wrong that might have caused
> this problem.
> 
> With regards to rectifying this problem, if you can roll-back that last patch
> that was applied out of order, then I think everything should apply just
> fine. If this is not possible, I would need to re-spin the 40 odd patches
> that currently fail to apply.

Greg,

I am pretty much done with spinning up the patches that are yet to be
applied with against this morning's tree. I will be sending them to you
shortly.

Regards,

K. Y
--
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/