On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:58:12PM -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 3.10-stable tree.
Stuff like this is very easy to miss when it comes in the middle of the
general spam about stable kernels; the review mails do get rather
vouluminous
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 07:21:10PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:58:12PM -0700, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 3.10-stable tree.
Stuff like this is very easy to miss when it comes in the middle of the
general spam
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:31:12AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 07:21:10PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
Stuff like this is very easy to miss when it comes in the middle of the
general spam about stable kernels; the review mails do get rather
vouluminous and unfortunately for
The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 3.10-stable tree.
I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at
Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt.
I could be totally wrong, and if so, please respond to
stable@vger.kernel.org and let me know why this patch should
