Hi, On Mon, Aug 27 2012, Shawn Guo wrote: > On 28 August 2012 07:07, Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Thanks, pushed to mmc-next for 3.6. (stable@ shouldn't be CC'd.) >> > I categorised it as a fix for a regression. It is a fix for a regression, but the rules for submitting patches to stable@ are significantly more strict than "is it a regression?". >From Documentation/stable-kernel-rules.txt: == Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the "-stable" tree: ... - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream). Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree: - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. You must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish it to be applied to. == It doesn't already exist in mainline -- so it shouldn't have been e-mailed to stable@ -- and even if it were already in mainline, you shouldn't e-mail stable@ without including the upstream commit ID and kernel version to apply it to. (Unless I'm missing something?) Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> <http://printf.net/> One Laptop Per Child -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
