On 3 September 2013 16:47, Alexey Kardashevskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 09/04/2013 01:34 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> The classic way for things to break is that a header
>> update accidentally reverts something (because a
>> previous update was from kvm-next and this one is
>> from mainline, for example). Accidental updates against
>> a kernel which is neither kvm-next nor mainline are
>> the other common "broken" version of a header update
>> patch.
>
> I can understand that but this update is a mainline kernel
> update and it is not an accidental one but very specific :-/

Nobody has been saying there is a problem with this
patch. We're just saying it should go via the kvm
tree rather than the trivial patches tree.

-- PMM
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to