On 27/02/19 17:10, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 27.02.19 16:36, no-re...@patchew.org wrote: >> Patchew URL: >> https://patchew.org/QEMU/20190221093459.22547-1-da...@redhat.com/ >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> This series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for >> more information: >> >> Message-id: 20190221093459.22547-1-da...@redhat.com >> Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1] include/exec/helper-head.h: support "const >> void *" in helper calls >> Type: series >> >> === TEST SCRIPT BEGIN === >> #!/bin/bash >> git rev-parse base > /dev/null || exit 0 >> git config --local diff.renamelimit 0 >> git config --local diff.renames True >> git config --local diff.algorithm histogram >> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --mailback base.. >> === TEST SCRIPT END === >> >> Updating 3c8cf5a9c21ff8782164d1def7f44bd888713384 >> From https://github.com/patchew-project/qemu >> * [new tag] patchew/20190221093459.22547-1-da...@redhat.com >> -> patchew/20190221093459.22547-1-da...@redhat.com >> * [new tag] >> patchew/20190225012530.28225-1-richardw.y...@linux.intel.com -> >> patchew/20190225012530.28225-1-richardw.y...@linux.intel.com >> * [new tag] >> patchew/20190225162325.24008-1-maxiw...@linux.ibm.com -> >> patchew/20190225162325.24008-1-maxiw...@linux.ibm.com >> Switched to a new branch 'test' >> >> === OUTPUT BEGIN === >> checkpatch.pl: no revisions returned for revlist '1' > > While patchew seems to be broken right now, I wonder why patches are > tested that are long upstream? Is this some leftover from fixing patchew?
Yes, Patchew is just catching up. :) Paolo
