From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-esdhc: break out early if clock is 0 Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 19:29:31 -0400 Message-ID: <87ehmrykv8.fsf@octavius.laptop.org> References: <1345648201-10746-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <87txvox7ba.fsf@octavius.laptop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:46700 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754853Ab2H0X3f (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 19:29:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Shawn Guo's message of "Tue, 28 Aug 2012 07:14:50 +0800") Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Shawn Guo Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Mon, Aug 27 2012, Shawn Guo wrote: > On 28 August 2012 07:07, Chris Ball wrote: >> Thanks, pushed to mmc-next for 3.6. (stable@ shouldn't be CC'd.) >> > I categorised it as a fix for a regression. It is a fix for a regression, but the rules for submitting patches to stable@ are significantly more strict than "is it a regression?". >>From Documentation/stable-kernel-rules.txt: == Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the "-stable" tree: ... - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream). Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree: - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to stable@vger.kernel.org. You must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish it to be applied to. == It doesn't already exist in mainline -- so it shouldn't have been e-mailed to stable@ -- and even if it were already in mainline, you shouldn't e-mail stable@ without including the upstream commit ID and kernel version to apply it to. (Unless I'm missing something?) Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child