From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756458Ab2B2JHd (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Feb 2012 04:07:33 -0500 Received: from na3sys009aog103.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.71]:35606 "EHLO na3sys009aog103.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755850Ab2B2JH3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Feb 2012 04:07:29 -0500 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tomi.valkeinen@ti.com designates 10.152.112.132 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tomi.valkeinen@ti.com Subject: Re: OMAP4 HDMI PHY bug work-around for stable From: Tomi Valkeinen To: Greg KH Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20120228164702.GB11021@kroah.com> References: <1328787865.1909.64.camel@deskari> <1330416193.2123.4.camel@deskari> <20120228164702.GB11021@kroah.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-eN4tXsJRt3mWXYkJ+VUv" Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:07:24 +0200 Message-ID: <1330506444.1934.20.camel@deskari> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --=-eN4tXsJRt3mWXYkJ+VUv Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 08:47 -0800, Greg KH wrote: > Sorry, but I don't accept pull requests. I need patches in email form, > as described in the file, Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt. Please > feel free to send them from your git tree that way. Ah, I somehow missed that txt when googling about the stable kernel. Thanks for pointing it out. > That seems like a lot of backporting for a single fix, but I'll be glad > to review them when you send them. This is something that is not quite clear to me: Should I strive for keeping the patches for stable as close as possible to the ones in mainline, and thus possibly being forced to take other extra patches with the actual fix as I did here or should I just rather cook up a new patch which just fixes the problem without caring about any cleanups etc. that are in the mainline, and thus possibly creating a rather different patch compared to mainline's version? Tomi --=-eN4tXsJRt3mWXYkJ+VUv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJPTerMAAoJEPo9qoy8lh71zbsP/ROgUHXxdyBhGUSNn+ZvCISq b7uDDLv+ud/QQPO/jyhcpEb8ud4+uIYjEUDY3oa34RpWxgwvIpZei/yX3A7BC1++ P7Md/Auzheq95tTsqVGVxPXGX8zs1wb+8CKUNzjANkqgPNxeKWb81QzabdyY4VYo 9tt1SCK2paVVgJgTpp20tggeKEo9P1R0ndzgxuHVjExGvm0NfFwYeb29MS8pWUMD UIOI0N4Ej9BDG6H3bR9/jHdP0ohGGpk6oosWIlPP/f3UlNEX/f8/hi3OqwlCvS6z B2qlFtvH6tnNbPhw4A2xWZUigdGvWGj4OrPr1TUTyCONf4txywKioehtt7/hUTvU +L6kNJVxi3gNQF0FPPma7lOW8V1Z5vEly8s6wpBO31Q9uFigg/UnfJxGdWyqvtUZ C9Er5VlAt5J4Dt4KMMzrrPP4MPGbrhBB4veVXnC7NVQhOGf1IQYxr9ssicraKWSv +CW5dG+S7vZquaukgXiErcwTxKdMmPcK9TSXsDFHsyw05GnKEYEReAATjmIHTUzP bSvd5A/wpZ6BL5TsA85iauUT3RpkYdJnhh/+pO1SqgRB8HQM91diZy01L0C6i6vU ZIR2aPnaTqWXEsKQb1FbhcVxYVFMUJhKcEFg2Wl/72Ih9T8rSQR9w/1jG4qyXgbY gTstfasu8UeJbWfLinrg =K/r6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-eN4tXsJRt3mWXYkJ+VUv--