On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 12:38:18PM +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 12:00, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 11:10:39AM +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> > > Although Greg already accepted the second patch into his testing tree,
> > > I still resend it to keep the patch integrity.
> >
> > Why? This is already in 2.6.18-rc3.
> I checked 2.6.18-rc3 and it doesn't include the patch of pci_regs.h.
I just looked, and it is there. Look at git commit
6f0312fd7e0e6f96fd847b0b2e1e0d2d2e8ef89d to see it.
> > Please redo the whole series against 2.6.18-rc3, not 2.6.17, otherwise
> > it's a pain to forward port...
> The patches could be applied to 2.6.18-rc3 cleanly. There is no any
> confliction and I tested them under 2.6.18-rc3.
Based on the above statement, I'm not so sure I believe that :)
> Is it necessary to rebase to 2.6.18-rc3?
You should at least regenerate them, yes.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]