Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 18:13:25 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Pavel Tatashin <soleen@gmail.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux@roeck-us.net,
        shuahkh@osg.samsung.com, patches@kernelci.org,
        ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk, lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/37] 4.4.110-stable review
Message-ID: <20180104171325.GP3235@1wt.eu>
References: <20180103195056.837404126@linuxfoundation.org>
 <CAOAebxs4wiAk--pH0q+-UXAv8BMiSH0n-4Y8WcdPuSaf2BXJOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180104165306.GA8332@kroah.com>
 <20180104170315.GO3235@1wt.eu>
 <20180104171102.GB30087@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180104171102.GB30087@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 06:11:02PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Can't this be because more patches are required in 4.4 to support this
> > patch set ? Or maybe a manual fix for a conflict that went wrong ? Just
> > trying to guess.
> 
> Odd thing is, the 4.9 series started from the 4.4 code for most of the
> patches, so I would expect that one to fail...

I see. Then maybe a missing patch somewhere in 4.4 compared to 4.9 :-/
I have no idea what to look for however.

Willy