[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1360021291.4538.19.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 00:41:31 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: Bing Zhao <bzhao@...vell.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Avinash Patil <patila@...vell.com>,
Kiran Divekar <dkiran@...vell.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [ 014/128] mwifiex: wakeup and stop multiple tx queues in
net_device
On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 11:43 -0800, Bing Zhao wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> > 3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >
> > ------------------
> >
> > From: Avinash Patil <patila@...vell.com>
> >
> > commit bbea3bc432dc5c08d09ca5c80afdd82515470688 upstream.
>
> This patch is not for stable kernel.
[...]
Right, I've managed to pick up 3 changes to mwifiex that it looks like I
shouldn't have included. Firstly:
9c969d8ccb1e mwifiex: check wait_event_interruptible return value
This had "3.6+" to the left of <stable@...r.kernel.org>, whereas I
expect version qualifiers to be on the right. So my import script just
put this in the queue without asking me to interpret the version
qualifier. (I don't automate *that* because people use too wide a
variety of syntaxes.)
When trying to apply that, I found that it seemed to depend on these
two:
bbea3bc432dc mwifiex: wakeup and stop multiple tx queues in net_device
b7097eb75fa1 mwifiex: handle association failure case correctly
which also looked like they were important fixes. Presumably I should
drop all of those?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
- Albert Einstein
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists