Hi David
07.04.2014, 18:13, "David Fries" :
> Evgeniy,
> Could you review this set of patches in this thread? Thanks.
I've checked it and it looks good, please resend it to lkml and Greg
Kroah-Hartman, he will pull it into the tree.
Feel free to add my Acked-by.
--
To unsubscribe from this
Hi David
07.04.2014, 18:13, David Fries da...@fries.net:
Evgeniy,
Could you review this set of patches in this thread? Thanks.
I've checked it and it looks good, please resend it to lkml and Greg
Kroah-Hartman, he will pull it into the tree.
Feel free to add my Acked-by.
--
To unsubscribe
Evgeniy,
Could you review this set of patches in this thread? Thanks.
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 08:27:44PM -0500, David Fries wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 01:07:28AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > Your approach and patch seem correct, but I worry about how old
> > commands are processed.
Evgeniy,
Could you review this set of patches in this thread? Thanks.
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 08:27:44PM -0500, David Fries wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 01:07:28AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Your approach and patch seem correct, but I worry about how old
commands are processed. Do I
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 01:07:28AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> Your approach and patch seem correct, but I worry about how old
> commands are processed. Do I get it right, that replies to old
> non-bundle commands are queued back instead of sending immediately,
> but since it is not bundle
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 01:07:28AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Your approach and patch seem correct, but I worry about how old
commands are processed. Do I get it right, that replies to old
non-bundle commands are queued back instead of sending immediately,
but since it is not bundle but
6 matches
Mail list logo
