From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.17-rc5: the latest consensus libata resume fix Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 23:18:05 -0400 Message-ID: <447A67ED.80106@garzik.org> References: <200605272245.30108.axboe@suse.de> <4478F681.8050607@garzik.org> <200605281128.00532.liml@rtr.ca> <20060528171424.GA12982@suse.de> <4479F487.5080507@garzik.org> <4479F76D.40506@rtr.ca> <447A03CC.50300@garzik.org> <20060528222832.GA26918@suse.de> <447A4E22.8090508@garzik.org> <447A621F.9060908@rtr.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:40124 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751129AbWE2DSM (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 May 2006 23:18:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <447A621F.9060908@rtr.ca> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: Jens Axboe , Linus Torvalds , "zhao, forrest" , Tejun Heo , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Mark Lord wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: >> >> If you and Mark would be kind enough to satisfy my paranoia, please >> test the current upstream kernel, without any additional patches, and >> make sure it works. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "upstream kernel" here, > but the latest 2.6.17-rc5-git* (including our patch) works for me. Yep, that's what I meant, thanks. I grant "upstream kernel" and "#upstream" are easily confused :/ even though I never interchange the two myself. Jeff