linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: core: remove the function power_saving_wk

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]

Date:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:13:54 +0200
From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
To:     Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@...il.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     saurav.girepunje@...mail.com, Larry.Finger@...inger.net,
        phil@...lpotter.co.uk, straube.linux@...il.com,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: core: remove the function power_saving_wk_hdl

On Monday, September 20, 2021 12:36:06 PM CEST Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 10:52:50PM +0530, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 13/09/21 9:48 pm, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:24:39PM +0530, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
> > > > Remove the function power_saving_wk_hdl() as it just calling
> > > > the rtw_ps_processor().Instead of power_saving_wk_hdl() call directly
> > > > rtw_ps_processor().
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@...il.com>
> > >
> > > []
> > > 
> > > Also does not apply to my tree.  Please rebase against my staging-next
> > > branch and resend.
> > > 
> > > thanks,
> > > 
> > > greg k-h
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > I always do rebase against your staging-testing branch. Can you help me 
to
> > understand.When we need to rebase on staging-next. Do we always need to
> > rebase against staging-next..!
> 
> Yes, you should.  When you are working on code that lots of other people
> are working on, there will be conflicts like this, and you just need to
> stay on top of it.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

Sorry, Greg. I'm confused... :(

As far as I know, everyone here make patches for staging-testing. You apply 
them to staging-testing first and, about 24 hours later, you merge them into 
staging-next. 

In fact I receive two distinct messages, one after the other, when you apply 
to staging-testing and then to staging-next. 

This is the what I've always done here and you haven't ever asked me to 
rebase against staging-next... So, why are you asking for doing that rebase 
on staging-next to Saurav?

Thanks,

Fabio