From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751839Ab2GYWs5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:48:57 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39565 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751206Ab2GYWs4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:48:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:48:52 +0100 From: Mel Gorman To: Greg KH Cc: Stable , Linux-MM , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/34] Memory management performance backports for -stable V2 Message-ID: <20120725224852.GF9222@suse.de> References: <1343050727-3045-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <20120725223057.GA4253@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120725223057.GA4253@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 03:30:57PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > All of the patches will apply to 3.0-stable but the ordering of the > > patches is such that applying them to 3.2-stable and 3.4-stable should > > be straight-forward. > > I can't find any of these that should have gone to 3.4-stable, given > that they all were included in 3.4 already, right? > Yes, you're right. At the time I wrote the changelog I had patches belonging to 3.5 included. I later decided to drop them until after 3.5 was out. It was potentially weird to have a 3.0-stable kernel with patches that were not in a released 3.x.0 kernel. Besides, they were very low priority. I forgot to update the changelog to match. > I've queued up the whole lot for the 3.0-stable tree, thanks so much for > providing them. > Thanks for reviewing them in detail and getting the flaws corrected. I expect it'll be a bit more smooth if/when I do something like this again. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx204.postini.com [74.125.245.204]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E3E3E6B004D for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:48:52 +0100 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/34] Memory management performance backports for -stable V2 Message-ID: <20120725224852.GF9222@suse.de> References: <1343050727-3045-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <20120725223057.GA4253@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120725223057.GA4253@kroah.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Greg KH Cc: Stable , Linux-MM , LKML On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 03:30:57PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > All of the patches will apply to 3.0-stable but the ordering of the > > patches is such that applying them to 3.2-stable and 3.4-stable should > > be straight-forward. > > I can't find any of these that should have gone to 3.4-stable, given > that they all were included in 3.4 already, right? > Yes, you're right. At the time I wrote the changelog I had patches belonging to 3.5 included. I later decided to drop them until after 3.5 was out. It was potentially weird to have a 3.0-stable kernel with patches that were not in a released 3.x.0 kernel. Besides, they were very low priority. I forgot to update the changelog to match. > I've queued up the whole lot for the 3.0-stable tree, thanks so much for > providing them. > Thanks for reviewing them in detail and getting the flaws corrected. I expect it'll be a bit more smooth if/when I do something like this again. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org