On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 23:01:00 +0100 Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > Hmm, I may have made a typo with that link. Here's the real one: > > https://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2017-03/msg00575.html > > > > > James - assuming I guessed correctly above, why is it that the second > > > patch "MIPS: Remove pt_regs adjustments in indirect syscall handler" > > > hasn't been applied? Was this fixed some other way upstream? > > > > I've just tried with v4.13-rc1 and the bug is still not fixed there. My > > guess is that the first patch is more obviously correct than the second > > one so was applied first. I have never received any feedback on these > > patches so I don't actually know why only one of them was applied. > > I'm certainly not able to review this patch, so I won't apply it until > it's either accepted upstream or reviewed by Aurelien or another MIPS > porter. >
Ben, James' two patches are included in 4.13. Forget to close this bug in latest upload to unstable? Best regards, Shengjing Zhu
