[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130306004609.GB28448@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 08:46:09 +0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: properly fix missing CONFIG_FW_LOADER
configurations
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 11:22:49PM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 05:54 +0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> > stable kernel tree. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
> > for how to do this properly.
>
> 0) Actually I just copied the addresses included in commit
> e121aefa7d9f10eee5cf26ed47129237a05d940b upstream without really
> thinking.
>
> 1) But actually thinking about this: that upstream commit did end up in
> the (longterm) v3.4.y series. And my patch is also relevant for the
> v3.8.y series.
As that patch was in the 3.5-rc7 release, how can it be relevant for
3.8, or anything greater than 3.5 at all?
> Can't this patch, that fixes an obviously bogus commit,
> which was important enough for stable, be itself submitted with
> CC:stable?
How can you expect me to apply something that is already in the tree? :)
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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