[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <987664A83D2D224EAE907B061CE93D5301EA7D992A@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 15:54:48 -0700
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: "Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/5] Yet another pass at machine check recovery
> Two slightly different versions showed up here almost on top of each other.
> Which one should we be looking at? Or do you want us to ignore both and you do
> another one with REPOST in the subject?
My script that added "in-reply-to" parts 1-5 to make them thread
from part 0 got a little over-enthusiastic and started recursing
on its own output.
The second version is identical (patchwise) to the first - it just
has a bogus "From: "Luck, Tony" line added.
I don't think I need to clutter the list with a repost.
Sorry for the noise and confusion - the bad script has been
told to go sit in the corner with a paper bag on its head.
-Tony
--
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