On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 05:58:30AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-10 at 11:02 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 11:05:48AM -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> > > 
> > > The patch below does not apply to the 3.5-stable tree.
> > > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> > > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> > > id to <[email protected]>.
> > > 
> > > thanks,
> > > 
> > 
> > This was expected and it is due to patches upstream that would be overkill
> > to backport. This version should apply and as it is the original version
> > of the patch it should still be ok with Hugh and Michal (cc'd just in case).
> > 
> > The same patch should be usable for 3.4-stable. I did not get rejection 
> > mails
> > but I would also suggest that this be merged to 3.0-stable and 3.2-stable
> > (added Ben to cc).
> [...]
> 
> I backported this myself rather than rejecting it.  I think you must not
> have noticed my note at the bottom of the original long commit message
> when I sent it out as part of 3.2.27-rc1. 

You're right, I did miss this this and I was cc'd on it so there is
no excuse.

> My version (commit
> 6f72a41f67bb23a6478a0277d97f563830d3f25d, attached) appears to retain
> some unnecessary complexity and leaves dead code, but does look
> equivalent to this.  But I'll be happy to substitute your cleaner
> backport.
> 

Your patch does look equivalent so if you want to keep it as you have
already released 3.2.27 that should be fine.

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

Reply via email to