Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753130AbcK0Xy4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Sun, 27 Nov 2016 18:54:56 -0500
Received: from tartarus.angband.pl ([89.206.35.136]:38034 "EHLO
        tartarus.angband.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752653AbcK0Xyq (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 27 Nov 2016 18:54:46 -0500
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 00:53:16 +0100
From: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl>
To: Manuel =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sch=F6lling?= <manuel.schoelling@gmx.de>
Cc: plagnioj@jcrosoft.com, tomi.valkeinen@ti.com, jslaby@suse.cz,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, andrey_utkin@fastmail.com,
        linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] console: Add persistent scrollback buffers for
 all VGA consoles
Message-ID: <20161127235316.GB29376@angband.pl>
References: <20161123173340.GA24872@angband.pl>
 <1480265509-20922-1-git-send-email-manuel.schoelling@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1480265509-20922-1-git-send-email-manuel.schoelling@gmx.de>
X-Junkbait: aaron@angband.pl, zzyx@angband.pl
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: kilobyte@angband.pl
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on tartarus.angband.pl); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 517
Lines: 17

\e[3J works well now, thanks!

I haven't found any more problems; your changes also appear to make no
regressions in at least nouveau fb (which obviously doesn't have this goodie
yet).

Patch 2 doesn't apply cleanly on current Linus' tree but it's just a matter
of more fuzz than "git am" allows.

Tested-by: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl>


Meow!
-- 
The bill declaring Jesus as the King of Poland fails to specify whether
the addition is at the top or end of the list of kings.  What should the
historians do?