On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 09:09:47AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 12/18/2013 09:09 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 08:44:26PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >> On 12/18/2013 08:15 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >>> Upstream commit 66fadea5b79c07154126bb0db375be915f611246 > >> > >> This is the reponse to > >> FAILED: patch "[PATCH] usb: musb: only cancel work if it is initialized" > >> failed to apply to 3.12-stable tree > >> > >> Patch #1 fixes a regression (as it says) and makes sure this one > >> applies cleanly. > > > > I don't understand at all, what am I supposed to do here with the stable > > kernel patches? > > Please take #1 which is also upstream and after that #2 (which failed > previously) will apply cleanly. I have no context at all here. I commit ids and patch names please. Remember, I deal with thousands of emails a day, and have the short term memory of a squirrel. greg k-h -- 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