Hi Greg,
This was not marked for stable but seems it should be in stable. Please apply to your queue of 4.14-stable.
-- Regards Sudip
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 10:44:45AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
Hi Greg,
This was not marked for stable but seems it should be in stable. Please apply to your queue of 4.14-stable.
Hi Sudip,
The i915 maintainers want to explicitly tag patches for stable, and avoid backporting non-tagged patches.
I can queue it up if one of the maintainers will ack it.
-- Thanks, Sasha
On 2018.10.31 10:38:19 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 10:44:45AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
Hi Greg,
This was not marked for stable but seems it should be in stable. Please apply to your queue of 4.14-stable.
Hi Sudip,
The i915 maintainers want to explicitly tag patches for stable, and avoid backporting non-tagged patches.
I can queue it up if one of the maintainers will ack it.
It looks good to me for backport.
Acked-by: Zhenyu Wang zhenyuw@linux.intel.com
thanks
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 10:30:12AM +0800, Zhenyu Wang wrote:
On 2018.10.31 10:38:19 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 10:44:45AM +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
Hi Greg,
This was not marked for stable but seems it should be in stable. Please apply to your queue of 4.14-stable.
Hi Sudip,
The i915 maintainers want to explicitly tag patches for stable, and avoid backporting non-tagged patches.
I can queue it up if one of the maintainers will ack it.
It looks good to me for backport.
Acked-by: Zhenyu Wang zhenyuw@linux.intel.com
Queued up, thanks!
-- Thanks, Sasha
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org