On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:20:17 -0700
Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2012-11-12 14:07, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:15:40 +1100
> > Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Andrew,
> >>
> >> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm tree got a conflict in
> >> drivers/memstick/core/ms_block.h between commit 0604fa04ccc7 ("memstick:
> >> add support for legacy memorysticks") that use to be in the block tree
> >> and commits "memstick: remove unused field from state struct", "memstick:
> >> ms_block: fix compile issue", "memstick: use after free in
> >> msb_disk_release()" and "memstick: memory leak on error in msb_ftl_scan
> >> ()" from the akpm tree.
> >>
> >> The block tree commit has been dropped, so the 4 akpm tree patches no
> >> longer have anything to apply to, so I have dropped them.
> >
> > Confused. Who dropped "memstick: add support for legacy memorysticks"?
> > You, or Jens?
>
> I dropped it for 3.7 submission, that's why it disappeared from my
> for-next.
But linux-next is the candidate 3.8 tree, so the memstick patches
should be in there. Or did you mean "3.8"?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
