From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxc: use correct macro when unmapping
	memory after save operation
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 17:02:36 +0100
Message-ID: <19931.54940.151724.34822@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
References: <4DD6E579.7060304@novell.com>
	<19931.47489.431098.743040@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<4DDBBFF1.4050905@novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DDBBFF1.4050905@novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@novell.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Jim Fehlig writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] libxc: use correct macro when unmapping memory after save operation"):
> BTW, thanks for the commit message note about "backporting to relevant
> earlier trees".  I was going to ask that this be applied to
> 4.1-testing.  Should such a statement be included for fixes that apply
> to multiple trees?  Is it helpful for scanning potential backports in
> -unstable?

Yes, exactly.  I think it would be a good idea to put such a statement
(including at least the literal string "backport" in such changes).

That's why I put it in in that case.  We're about to do RCs point
releases for 4.0 and 4.1 but after that we should consider these
changes.

Ian.