On 03/05/2016 08:24 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Hi Sasha, > > The following series contains v4.1.y stable backports for a number > of target patches from upstream code, that don't appear in your > stable tree. > > Also included is a small complile fix specific to v4.1.y code. > > Please apply at your earliest convience. Thanks Nicholas, I've added both series to their corresponding trees. > Btw, I didn't seen any 'failed to apply' messages from you for > any of these patches, which is how I tell from Greg-KH when > something needs to be manually backported. > > Is there a reason for not sending out 'failed to apply' emails..? Good point. Since I was only maintaining 3.18 so far, I'd wait for maintainers to respond to Greg's mails about failure to apply on either 4.1 or 3.14, and just take their backport from there - which did the trick, and also reduced the amount of mails maintainers get regarding -stable trees. I don't have a problem with starting to send "F-T-A" mails as well, but I wonder if we can somehow coordinate these mails between myself and Greg so we won't send one for each and every kernel version, but rather one specifying which stable versions failed to apply? Greg, What are your thoughts about this? Thanks, Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html