From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [stable] nfsd changes for 2.6.34 Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:41:09 -0400 Message-ID: <20100421234108.GD23480@fieldses.org> References: <20100306175212.GB22650@fieldses.org> <20100324142414.GE12057@fieldses.org> <20100329182443.GC3778@kroah.com> <20100330144054.GD11545@fieldses.org> <20100330200320.GB1693@kroah.com> <20100331193029.GC4937@fieldses.org> <20100421225048.GB27883@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: stable@kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Greg KH Return-path: Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:40233 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753572Ab0DUXlP (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:41:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100421225048.GB27883@kroah.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 03:50:48PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 03:30:29PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 01:03:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > Ok, care to backport them and send them to stable@kernel.org? They > > > don't all apply cleanly from what I can see. > > > > Huh. I just checked out 2.6.32.10 and tried applying the patches a > > couple different ways, and the worst I got was stuff like: > > > > patching file net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c > > Hunk #1 succeeded at 711 (offset 5 lines). > > > > Is that enough that you don't consider them clean? > > > > In any case, I'll follow up with patches generated against 2.6.32.10. > > You are right, I don't know what I did wrong, sorry. I've now queued > all of these up for the next .32 tree, as they are already in > .33-stable. OK, thanks.--b.