From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] SCSI merge for 2.6.13 Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 19:56:19 -0500 Message-ID: <1126140979.4823.65.camel@mulgrave> References: <1126053452.5012.28.camel@mulgrave> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel , SCSI Mailing List , Jens Axboe , Greg KH List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 17:49 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Quite frankly, what's the point in asking people to pull a tree that is > > known to not compile? > > Btw, I see the patch that is supposed to fix it, but I'm in no position to > know whether it's even acceptable to basically double the size of the > "struct klist", for example. There may be a good reason why Greg hasn't > been merging the klist stuff, and just assuming that they are merged not > only screws up everybody down-stream, it's not necessarily valid in the > first place. > > In other words, I think I will have to just revert the commit that > introduces this bogus "assume a patch that wasn't merged" (commit ID > 2b7d6a8cb9718fc1d9e826201b64909c44a915f4) for now. > > And once more strongly complain about it getting sent to me in the first > place since it was known to not even compile. He's been on holiday, but he did send me a sign off for that particular patch so I could put it through the SCSI tree. However, because Andrew sent you the patch before I could do this, there didn't seem to be any necessity ... James