From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi_debug: virtual_gb ignores sector_size Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 11:44:34 -0400 Message-ID: <1272815074.23834.40.camel@mulgrave.site> References: <4BD419BF.4040109@interlog.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:53555 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755370Ab0EBPoj (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 May 2010 11:44:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4BD419BF.4040109@interlog.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: dgilbert@interlog.com Cc: SCSI development list , "Martin K. Petersen" On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 12:30 +0200, Douglas Gilbert wrote: > --- linux/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c 2010-03-24 20:13:03.000000000 > +0100 > +++ linux/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c2633mqnu2ss 2010-04-25 > 12:03:50.000000000 +0200 > @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ > #include "scsi_logging.h" > > #define SCSI_DEBUG_VERSION "1.82" > -static const char * scsi_debug_version_date = "20100324"; > +static const char * scsi_debug_version_date = "20100425"; I got a rejection here ... presumably because there's a missing patch somewhere along the way. I've got to say, I don't think bumping the date with every patch is a good idea ... apart from the patch ordering problems, it will give rejections every time I try to send a patch to stable (which I'm doing with this). James