On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 15:05 -0500, Brian King wrote:
>
> Same here.
>
> When did this last work on this system? It seems like this is
> completely
> separate from the libata issue.
It's separate. See my other internal message. This is a BML system and
it's broken as far as 2.6.36 but the BML "p
On 06/23/2011 12:15 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 23.06.2011 [14:42:00 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging
On 23.06.2011 [14:42:00 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> > > Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
> >
> > BTW. Current upstream with that patch
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:42 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> > > Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
> >
> > BTW. Current upstream with that pa
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 14:31 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> > Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
>
> BTW. Current upstream with that patch applied on a machine here leads to
> several oddities, I don't know at
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:30 -0500, Brian King wrote:
> Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
BTW. Current upstream with that patch applied on a machine here leads to
several oddities, I don't know at this point whether any of that is
actually a regression :
> Thanks,
>
On 06/21/2011 04:30 PM, Brian King wrote:
Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
Looks good here too -- though of course we want to move towards purging
old-EH paths :)
Queued...
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@li
Looks good to me. Jeff/Tejun - any issues with merging this?
Thanks,
Brian
On 06/21/2011 11:07 AM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> Ping on this -- Tejun, Brian, Jeff, this is a pretty annoying 2.6.39
> regression which it would be good to have fixed in 3.0.
>
> Thanks,
> Nish
>
> On 16.06.2011 [0
Ping on this -- Tejun, Brian, Jeff, this is a pretty annoying 2.6.39
regression which it would be good to have fixed in 3.0.
Thanks,
Nish
On 16.06.2011 [08:28:36 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> > On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >
On 16.06.2011 [08:28:39 -0500], Brian King wrote:
> On 06/16/2011 02:51 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 04:34:17PM -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> >>> That looks like the right thing to do. For ipr's usage of
> >>> libata, we don't have the concept of a port frozen state, so th
10 matches
Mail list logo