[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180921145651.GS3821@sasha-vm>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 14:56:54 +0000
From: Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
CC: Song Qiang <songqiang1304521@...il.com>,
"jic23@...nel.org" <jic23@...nel.org>,
"knaack.h@....de" <knaack.h@....de>,
"lars@...afoo.de" <lars@...afoo.de>,
"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] iio: proximity: Add driver support for ST's
VL53L0X ToF ranging sensor.
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 09:41:39AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 18:58:37 +0000
>Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> [This is an automated email]
>>
>> This commit has been processed because it contains a -stable tag.
>> The stable tag indicates that it's relevant for the following trees: all
>>
>> The bot has tested the following trees: v4.18.8, v4.14.70, v4.9.127, v4.4.156, v3.18.122,
>>
>> v4.18.8: Build OK!
>> v4.14.70: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
>> 22aac3eb0c46 ("MAINTAINERS: add entry for STM32 I2C driver")
>>
>> v4.9.127: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
>> 22aac3eb0c46 ("MAINTAINERS: add entry for STM32 I2C driver")
>> 78f839029e1d ("iio: distance: srf08: add IIO driver for us ranger")
>>
>> v4.4.156: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
>> 22aac3eb0c46 ("MAINTAINERS: add entry for STM32 I2C driver")
>> 78f839029e1d ("iio: distance: srf08: add IIO driver for us ranger")
>>
>> v3.18.122: Failed to apply! Possible dependencies:
>> 22aac3eb0c46 ("MAINTAINERS: add entry for STM32 I2C driver")
>> 4193c0f1d863 ("iio: driver for Semtech SX9500 proximity solution")
>> 78f839029e1d ("iio: distance: srf08: add IIO driver for us ranger")
>>
>>
>> Please let us know how to resolve this.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Sasha
>Hi Sasha,
>
>This is a false detection. The stable tag is in the context of the
>additions to MAINTAINERS. I guess that is a rare enough case it's not
>worth fixing in your scripts, but thought I'd point it out incase you
>want to do so!
Hah, interesting!
I'll get it fixed, thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists