On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 11:09:38AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > At Wed, 08 Dec 2010 10:55:30 +0100, > David Henningsson wrote: > > > > On 2010-12-07 09:28, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > At Mon, 6 Dec 2010 11:48:27 -0800, > > > Greg KH wrote: > > >> > > >> This breaks the build on the .36 kernel tree, so I'm not including it > > >> there. If you want it included in that stable tree, please provide me > > >> with a working backport. > > > > > > Looks like a fuzz while applying to 2.6.36. > > > > > > David, care to refresh the patch and submit again? > > > (don't forget to add the upstream commit id with the update patch) > > > > Sorry, I gave it a try, but unfortunately I'll have to give up on this > > one due to lack of time/priority. It seems like at least the two commits > > below are needed to make the patch work, but I'm not sure it's enough. > > Maybe we end up with a too large dependency chain to qualify it for a > > stable update anyway. > > Ah, so this is actually no regression fix, as the new chips weren't > supported by 2.6.36 anyway :) > > I think we can drop it from stable.
Thanks, that makes sense, I'll not worry about it anymore :) greg k-h _______________________________________________ stable mailing list [email protected] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable
