Julian Calaby writes:
>>> [1] Oddly I cannot find patch 19 from patchwork, I don't know what
>>> happened to it. I do see it on the mailing list, though.
>>
>> Actually another nacked patch 16 also has disappeared from patchwork, so
>> I'm not going to apply that
Hi Kalle,
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Julian Calaby wrote:
> Hi Kalle,
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:37 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Kalle Valo writes:
>>
>>> Julian Calaby writes:
>>>
This is a
Julian Calaby writes:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Julian Calaby
> wrote:
>> Hi Kalle,
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:37 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> Kalle Valo writes:
>>>
Thank you for
Hi Kalle,
This is a set of all patches in patchwork which were pending when the 4.6
merge window opened that meet the following criteria:
1. They're sane
2. They're either obviously correct, I can review them, or they've been
reviewed or ACK'd by someone else.
3. They don't require any code
Julian Calaby writes:
> This is a set of all patches in patchwork which were pending when the 4.6
> merge window opened that meet the following criteria:
>
> 1. They're sane
> 2. They're either obviously correct, I can review them, or they've been
>reviewed or ACK'd
Kalle Valo writes:
> Julian Calaby writes:
>
>> This is a set of all patches in patchwork which were pending when the 4.6
>> merge window opened that meet the following criteria:
>>
>> 1. They're sane
>> 2. They're either obviously correct, I can
Hi Kalle,
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:37 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Kalle Valo writes:
>
>> Julian Calaby writes:
>>
>>> This is a set of all patches in patchwork which were pending when the 4.6
>>> merge window opened that meet