linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Staging: lustre: Fix return does not need parantheses

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 11 Jan 2014 12:36:51 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Monam Agarwal <monamagarwal123@...il.com>
Cc:	bergwolf@...il.com, andreas.dilger@...el.com,
	keith.mannthey@...el.com, oleg.drokin@...el.com,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Staging: lustre: Fix return does not need
 parantheses

On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 01:31:41AM +0530, Monam Agarwal wrote:
> The patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl error in
> lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
> ERROR: return is not a function, parentheses are not required 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Monam Agarwal <monamagarwal123@...il.com>

I'm totally confused here.  You have multiple series of patches, sent
with different version numbers, some with the same subjects, and some
not.

I've deleted all of your lustre patches from my queue because of this, I
don't want to apply something incorrectly.

Please step back, take a day, and resend all of your pending patches
that I have not applied for the lustre code, in a single series, so I
know what I should be looking at here.

There's no rush, so please take your time and do your best to keep an
overworked maintainer from getting things wrong.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/