From: "Matt Carlson" <mcarl...@broadcom.com> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:52:48 -0800
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 03:11:03PM -0800, David Miller wrote: >> From: "Matt Carlson" <mcarl...@broadcom.com> >> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:06:13 -0800 >> >> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 02:39:35PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: >> >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 02:51:10PM -0800, Matt Carlson wrote: >> >> > If management firmware is present and the device is down, the firmware >> >> > will assume control of the phy. If a phy access were allowed from the >> >> > host, it will collide with firmware phy accesses, resulting in >> >> > unpredictable behavior. This patch fixes the problem by disallowing phy >> >> > accesses during the problematic condition. >> >> > >> >> > Upstream commit ID f746a3136a61ae535c5d0b49a9418fa21edc61b5 >> >> >> >> There is no such upstream git commit id in Linus's tree. What am I >> >> doing wrong here? >> > >> > The commit is in Dave Miller's net-next-2.6 tree. >> > >> >> If it wasn't appropriate for net-2.6, it absolutely it not appropriate >> for -stable. > > net-2.6 was the target tree for the patch. The stable_kernel_rules.txt > seemed to suggest that I could just CC sta...@kernel.org with the > commit ID, and Greg would pull it in as the process dictates. If that > isn't correct, what is the preferred way to expedite the integration of > a patch? You are posting a commit ID for the net-next-2.6 tree, that's what triggered my response. Unless it also went into the net-2.6 tree (in which case you should give Greg the net-2.6 commit ID, which is also what the commit ID must be in Linus's tree right now), the change is not appropriate for -stable submission. _______________________________________________ stable mailing list stable@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/stable
