linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "regulator: core: Add support for active-discharge configuration"

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

Message-ID: <56F550B0.7050602@mentor.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Mar 2016 16:52:32 +0200
From:	Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "regulator: core: Add support for active-discharge
 configuration"

On 25.03.2016 13:10, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 09:52:01PM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> This reverts commit 909f7ee0b5f30f735e16864a7ed18d2e6123e6d9.
>>
>> Apparently due to a wrongly resolved merge conflict between two
>> branches, which contained the same commit, the commit contents
>> partially was added two times in a row.
> 
> Please submit patches using subject lines reflecting the style for the
> subsystem.  This makes it easier for people to identify relevant
> patches.
> 

Okay, submitting of reverted patches is different I believe:

http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg75667.html

RMK:

    I think it's sensible to keep at least the summary line of
    a 'git revert' intact rather than inventing our own.

That discussion was about a8cf81ffe028 '(Revert "[ARM] unconditionally
define __virt_to_phys and __phys_to_virt")'

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir