From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751483AbWGaFSE (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:18:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751486AbWGaFSE (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:18:04 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:19369 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751483AbWGaFSD (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:18:03 -0400 Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:06:35 -0700 From: Greg KH To: "Zhang, Yanmin" Cc: LKML , linux-pci maillist , Tom Long Nguyen Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] PCI-Express AER implemetation: Add new defines to pci_regs.h Message-ID: <20060731050635.GA29058@kroah.com> References: <1154314837.27051.26.camel@ymzhang-perf.sh.intel.com> <1154315439.27051.29.camel@ymzhang-perf.sh.intel.com> <20060731040045.GC13995@kroah.com> <1154320698.27051.48.camel@ymzhang-perf.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1154320698.27051.48.camel@ymzhang-perf.sh.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 12:38:18PM +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 12:00, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 11:10:39AM +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > > Although Greg already accepted the second patch into his testing tree, > > > I still resend it to keep the patch integrity. > > > > Why? This is already in 2.6.18-rc3. > I checked 2.6.18-rc3 and it doesn't include the patch of pci_regs.h. I just looked, and it is there. Look at git commit 6f0312fd7e0e6f96fd847b0b2e1e0d2d2e8ef89d to see it. > > Please redo the whole series against 2.6.18-rc3, not 2.6.17, otherwise > > it's a pain to forward port... > The patches could be applied to 2.6.18-rc3 cleanly. There is no any > confliction and I tested them under 2.6.18-rc3. Based on the above statement, I'm not so sure I believe that :) > Is it necessary to rebase to 2.6.18-rc3? You should at least regenerate them, yes. thanks, greg k-h