[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ac8a097e-a110-433b-99ae-1419d6444261@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 08:37:50 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the bluetooth tree
Hi,
On 1/31/25 3:16 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> The following commits are also in the net tree as different commits
> (but the same patches):
>
> 07b6216dfc34 ("Bluetooth: Add ABI doc for sysfs reset")
> 52f17be9931e ("Bluetooth: btnxpuart: Fix glitches seen in dual A2DP streaming")
> 56cec66d6163 ("Bluetooth: L2CAP: accept zero as a special value for MTU auto-selection")
> 9e2714de7384 ("Bluetooth: Fix possible infinite recursion of btusb_reset")
> ec5570088c6a ("Bluetooth: btusb: mediatek: Add locks for usb_driver_claim_interface()")
I pulled from:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bluetooth/bluetooth.git
tags/for-net-2025-01-29
AFAICS net hashes match the above tag. @Luiz: did you by chance rebased
your tree before tagging it and sending the PR? Just to understand the
root cause of the above difference.
Thanks,
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists