On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 00:09 -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Yes, the big question is if we want to use this patch or fix the PIO. I think > > this one is much less intrusive, so I'd vouch for yours for 3.10 . > > Correct. Also according to Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt : > > "Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the > "-stable" tree: > > .... > - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context." > > Your PIO fix is really appreciated, but it surpasses 100 lines, so it > would be better if we go with this one first so that it can reach > 3.10, and then we can use your PIO fix later. That one is not a hard and fast rule, but small localised fixes are preferred if possible. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part