linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Device Tree updates of UniPhier SoCs for Linux 4.3

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]

Message-ID: <20150813092721.GF30160@localhost>
Date:	Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:27:21 +0200
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:	arm@...nel.org, Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Device Tree updates of UniPhier SoCs for Linux 4.3

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:39:47PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> 2015-08-11 22:20 GMT+09:00 Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>:
> > On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 07:37:44PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> >> Hi Olof and Arnd,
> >>
> >> Here are a little more updates for device trees for UniPhier SoCs.
> >>
> >> Please consider applying this series to your ARM-SOC tree.
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Please always comment on when the previous when you respin. I didn't
> > see this thread until after I had applied v1.
> >
> > I've taken 2/4 directly now, since it's the only difference.
> 
> 
> Instead, build fails between commit a5e921b4771 and 63ef577d9
> because 2/4 is a pre-requisite patch for 3/4 and /4/4.
> 
> 
> Maybe I should have sent a pull-request instead of patches.

The most important thing you should have done is followed up on the bad
patch series. Sending this as a pull request wouldn't have saved you if
you had just sent a second pull request without withdrawing the first one.

Sending patches and pull requests make little different for us for a new
platform with only a few patches per release. We still need to review
your code before we merge it. Actually, doing it as patches is sometimes
a bit easier since we can touch up trivial things instead of asking you
to redo the pull request.


-Olof
--
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/