* Fengguang Wu <fengguang...@intel.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 03:51:04PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 09:33:55AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * kernel test robot <ying.hu...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > FYI, we noticed the below changes on
> > > >
> > > > git://internal_mailing_list_patch_tree
> > > > Ingo-Molnar/string-Improve-the-generic-strlcpy-implementation
> > > > commit 5f6f0801f5fdfce4984c6a14f99dbfbb417acb66 ("string: Improve the
> > > > generic strlcpy() implementation")
> > >
> > > Hm, there's no such commit ID anywhere I can see - did you rebase my tree
> > > perhaps?
> >
> > Ingo, all applied patches will be uploaded to github from now on.
Thanks!
You might want to move that to korg instead, because many people don't like to
pull from github.
> > Here is the exact commit:
> >
> > https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Ingo-Molnar/string-Improve-the-generic-strlcpy-implementation
>
> Sorry that's already the rebased commit.. The old version was applied
> to 4.3-rc4 while the new one is applied to 4.3-rc5.
So as long as you have the tested sha1 mentioned in the bug report, and that
sha1
can be pulled from somewhere on korg, I'm a happy camper: in this particular
case
it would have told me whether your testing tree had upstream fix 990486c8af or
not.
Rebasing and applying email patches for testing purposes is otherwise perfectly
OK, as long as the precise Git tree used for testing can be fetched.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
