Hi, On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 2:58 AM, Patchwork <patchw...@linuxtv.org> wrote: > Hello, > > The following patches (submitted by you) have been updated in patchwork: > > * [RESEND,media] v4l2: define V4L2_PIX_FMT_NV16M and V4L2_PIX_FMT_NV24M > pixel formats > - http://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/13555/ > was: New > now: Superseded > > * [RESEND,media] v4l2: define V4L2_PIX_FMT_NV16M and V4L2_PIX_FMT_NV24M > pixel formats > - http://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/13556/ > was: New > now: Changes Requested
Patchwork has moved my V4L2_PIX_FMT_NV16M and V4L2_PIX_FMT_NV24M definitions patch (http://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/13556) from New to Changes Requested, but I couldn't look-up what changes need to be made. Where can I find such feedback? Just for the record, in a previous conversation with Mauro, he suggested that new pixel formats don't get defined in the kernel unless a v4l2 device driver is actually using them (so suggesting to also upstream the driver, which isn't immediately possible). -Ilyes > This email is a notification only - you do not need to respond. > > - > > Patches submitted to linux-media@vger.kernel.org have the following > possible states: > > New: Patches not yet reviewed (typically new patches); > > Under review: When it is expected that someone is reviewing it (typically, > the driver's author or maintainer). Unfortunately, patchwork > doesn't have a field to indicate who is the driver maintainer. > If in doubt about who is the driver maintainer please check the > MAINTAINERS file or ask at the ML; > > Superseded: when the same patch is sent twice, or a new version of the > same patch is sent, and the maintainer identified it, the first > version is marked as such; > > Obsoleted: patch doesn't apply anymore, because the modified code doesn't > exist anymore. > > Changes requested: when someone requests changes at the patch; > > Rejected: When the patch is wrong or doesn't apply. Most of the > time, 'rejected' and 'changes requested' means the same thing > for the developer: he'll need to re-work on the patch. > > RFC: patches marked as such and other patches that are also RFC, but the > patch author was not nice enough to mark them as such. That includes: > - patches sent by a driver's maintainer who send patches > via git pull requests; > - patches with a very active community (typically from developers > working with embedded devices), where lots of versions are > needed for the driver maintainer and/or the community to be > happy with. > > Not Applicable: for patches that aren't meant to be applicable via > the media-tree.git. > > Accepted: when some driver maintainer says that the patch will be applied > via his tree, or when everything is ok and it got applied > either at the main tree or via some other tree (fixes tree; > some other maintainer's tree - when it belongs to other subsystems, > etc); > > If you think any status change is a mistake, please send an email to the ML. > > - > > This is an automated mail sent by the patchwork system at > patchwork.linuxtv.org. To stop receiving these notifications, edit > your mail settings at: > http://patchwork.linuxtv.org/mail/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
