Re: Unique commit-id for "mm: compaction: [P,p]artially revert capture of suitable high-order page"

[Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 09:01:34AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 01:09:11PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 12:27:20PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 05:12:45PM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > > >> Hi Linus,
> > > >>
> > > >> I see two different commit-id for an identical patch (only subject
> > > >> line differs).
> > > >> [1] seems to be applied directly and [2] came with a merge of akpm-fixes.
> > > >> What is in case of backports for -stable kernels?
> > > >
> > > > I do not expect it to matter. I was going to use
> > > > 8fb74b9fb2b182d54beee592350d9ea1f325917a as the commit ID whenever I got
> > > > the complaint mail from Greg's tools about a 3.7 merge failure. The 3.7.2
> > > > backport looks like this.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Oh cool and thanks!
> > > Are you planning to resend this backport-patch to the lists w/ a "3.7"
> > > (or for-3.7) in the commit-subject?
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, when I get the reject mail from Greg's tools.
> 
> You should have that rejection email now :)
> 

*sniff* so mean, there should be a support group for all this rejection.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs