From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754570Ab0IYByl (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Sep 2010 21:54:41 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:47914 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753863Ab0IYByj (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Sep 2010 21:54:39 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Greg KH Cc: "Hans J. Koch" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner References: <20100917205946.GF2522@local> <20100924104555.GC1819@silverbox.local> <20100924173106.GA4966@silverbox.local> <20100925003308.GA29910@suse.de> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:54:34 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20100925003308.GA29910@suse.de> (Greg KH's message of "Fri, 24 Sep 2010 17:33:08 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=98.207.157.188;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.157.188 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa05 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.4 UNTRUSTED_Relay Comes from a non-trusted relay X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa05 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Greg KH X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] uio hotplug support X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:31:04 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greg KH writes: > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 05:05:17PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> "Hans J. Koch" writes: >> >> > >> > Hmm, I applied your first series of 5 patches (which I signed-off). When >> > trying to apply your second series, I get this from quilt: >> > >> > Applying patch 2_1-Simplify-the-lifetime-logic-of-struct-uio_device.patch >> > patching file drivers/uio/uio.c >> > Hunk #2 succeeded at 287 (offset 8 lines). >> > Hunk #3 succeeded at 312 (offset 8 lines). >> > Hunk #4 FAILED at 339. >> > Hunk #5 succeeded at 806 (offset 17 lines). >> > Hunk #6 FAILED at 831. >> > Hunk #7 FAILED at 858. >> > Hunk #8 FAILED at 889. >> > 4 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file drivers/uio/uio.c >> > Patch 2_1-Simplify-the-lifetime-logic-of-struct-uio_device.patch does not apply (enforce with -f) >> > >> > The first series applied without any fuzz against 2.6.36-rc5. >> >> I am stumped. Do you perhaps have some local uio changes? >> >> Using 2.6.36-rc5 as a base I tried it twice. Once by taking my patches >> that I sent, and again by saving my email and then applying the changes. >> >> Both times the changes applied cleanly. No offsets, and no fuzz. At >> least that is what git-am said. >> >> Should I perhaps make a git branch you could pull? > > Try it on linux-next, as I've applied your previous patches there > already. Done. git-am on my saved mbox works without problems. The worst I get is a warning about trailing whitespace. Nothing that looks like the above. Eric