Hi Russell,

On Tuesday 15 October 2013 17:06:57 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Bad move.

Wrong status indeed. I wasn't planning to apply the patch through my tree as 
it's part of a much larger series. Sorry for the noise.

> ----- Forwarded message from Patchwork <[email protected]> -----
> 
> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:58:03 -0000
> From: Patchwork <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [linux-media] Patch notification: 1 patch updated
> Delivery-date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 16:58:09 +0100
> 
> Hello,
> 
> The following patch (submitted by you) has been updated in patchwork:
> 
>  * linux-media: [31/51] DMA-API: media: omap3isp: use
> dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent() - http://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/20178/
>      - for: Linux Media kernel patches
>     was: New
>     now: Accepted
> 
> This email is a notification only - you do not need to respond.
> 
> -
> 
> Patches submitted to [email protected] 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 Superseded: when the same patch is sent twice, or a new version of the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. It is also used when a patch was
>           superseeded by a git pull request.
> 
> 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/
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to