diff for duplicates of <2843000.pAMepr1eOs@natalenko.name> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 408a6fa..61ce665 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -3,13 +3,13 @@ Then, Reported-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name> Tested-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name> -On =C4=8Dtvrtek 9. listopadu 2017 17:55:58 CET Jens Axboe wrote: +On čtvrtek 9. listopadu 2017 17:55:58 CET Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/09/2017 09:54 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-11-09 at 07:16 +0100, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: > >> is this something known to you, or it is just my fault applying this > >> series to v4.13? Except having this warning, suspend/resume works for > >> me: -> >>=20 +> >> > >> [ 27.383846] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Starting disk > >> [ 27.383976] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Starting disk > >> [ 27.451218] sdb: Attempt to allocate non-preempt request in @@ -17,19 +17,19 @@ On =C4=8Dtvrtek 9. listopadu 2017 17:55:58 CET Jens Axboe wrote: > >> mode. > >> [ 27.459640] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > >> [ 27.464521] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 172 at block/blk-core.c:823 -> >> blk_queue_enter+0x222/0x280>=20 +> >> blk_queue_enter+0x222/0x280> > > Hello Oleksandr, -> >=20 +> > > > Thanks for the testing. The warning that you reported is expected. Maybe > > it > > should be left out to avoid that users get confused. ->=20 +> > If the warning is expected, then it should be removed. It'll just confuse > users and cause useless bug reports. ->=20 +> > > Jens, this patch series still applies cleanly on top of your > > for-4.15/block > > branch. Are you fine with this patch series or do you perhaps want me to > > repost it with Oleksandr's Tested-by tag added to each patch? ->=20 +> > Since you need to kill the warning anyway, let's get it respun. diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index fc01107..da3a06c 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -19,13 +19,13 @@ "Reported-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>\n" "Tested-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>\n" "\n" - "On =C4=8Dtvrtek 9. listopadu 2017 17:55:58 CET Jens Axboe wrote:\n" + "On \304\215tvrtek 9. listopadu 2017 17:55:58 CET Jens Axboe wrote:\n" "> On 11/09/2017 09:54 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:\n" "> > On Thu, 2017-11-09 at 07:16 +0100, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:\n" "> >> is this something known to you, or it is just my fault applying this\n" "> >> series to v4.13? Except having this warning, suspend/resume works for\n" "> >> me:\n" - "> >>=20\n" + "> >> \n" "> >> [ 27.383846] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Starting disk\n" "> >> [ 27.383976] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] Starting disk\n" "> >> [ 27.451218] sdb: Attempt to allocate non-preempt request in\n" @@ -33,21 +33,21 @@ "> >> mode.\n" "> >> [ 27.459640] ------------[ cut here ]------------\n" "> >> [ 27.464521] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 172 at block/blk-core.c:823\n" - "> >> blk_queue_enter+0x222/0x280>=20\n" + "> >> blk_queue_enter+0x222/0x280> \n" "> > Hello Oleksandr,\n" - "> >=20\n" + "> > \n" "> > Thanks for the testing. The warning that you reported is expected. Maybe\n" "> > it\n" "> > should be left out to avoid that users get confused.\n" - ">=20\n" + "> \n" "> If the warning is expected, then it should be removed. It'll just confuse\n" "> users and cause useless bug reports.\n" - ">=20\n" + "> \n" "> > Jens, this patch series still applies cleanly on top of your\n" "> > for-4.15/block\n" "> > branch. Are you fine with this patch series or do you perhaps want me to\n" "> > repost it with Oleksandr's Tested-by tag added to each patch?\n" - ">=20\n" + "> \n" > Since you need to kill the warning anyway, let's get it respun. -2f99e28dd5d7e733e3b26b2e3326312cc0e40d99164d7479ee61d3dd7ca62519 +b487a7fc4d863f01183f86e6a004d53a8a467975af5bba43bec6ba35d6bd0f5a
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.