On 9 September 2014 09:27, Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 09 Sep, at 09:03:31AM, Mathias Krause wrote: >> On 8 September 2014 21:41, Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > Since they don't apply to the 'next' branch (queue for v3.18) and since >> > they're cleanups with minimal risk, I've applied them to the 'urgent' >> > branch. >> >> Sorry, I should have checked that! I can send a rebased version if you >> want me to. > > Nah, don't worry. I usually prefer that people base their patches on > Linus' tree and an -rc or final v3.x tag. > > I got some pushback from the tip folks on including these patches in an > urgent pull request because they're not regression fixes. What I've now > done is stuck them on the queue for v3.18 in 'next'. That's okay, too. They're no urgent fixes, after all. > Everything applied cleanly apart from "x86/efi: Unexport add_efi_memmap > variable", because of recent changes to move the "noefi" handling code > out of arch/x86. Yeah. I tried a rebase and got the same conflict. It's easy to fix, though. > > I fixed up the conflict, but please take a look at the 'next' branch and > see whether your rebased patches look correct. Looks good. Thanks, Matt! Cheers, Mathias -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
