On Thu, 17 Jul 2014, Lennox Wu wrote:
> Yes, you might miss something. Some patches were merged once I
> acknowledged them,and some were missed.
> So I am not sure the rule, if someone will merge these patches once
> them are acknowledged, it is redundant that I issue a
> PULL request again.
>
Y
On 07/17/2014 10:52 AM, Lennox Wu wrote:
> Yes, you might miss something. Some patches were merged once I
> acknowledged them,and some were missed.
> So I am not sure the rule, if someone will merge these patches once
> them are acknowledged, it is redundant that I issue a
> PULL request again.
>
Yes, you might miss something. Some patches were merged once I
acknowledged them,and some were missed.
So I am not sure the rule, if someone will merge these patches once
them are acknowledged, it is redundant that I issue a
PULL request again.
2014-07-17 10:30 GMT+08:00 Guenter Roeck :
> On 07/
On 07/16/2014 07:14 PM, Lennox Wu wrote:
Actually, I don't know the rule for merging patches. Some patches will
be merge,and some will be miss. If the patch is missed, we will merge
it into our git.
Unless I am missing something, this patch is in arch/score, so the
expectation would be for you
Actually, I don't know the rule for merging patches. Some patches will
be merge,and some will be miss. If the patch is missed, we will merge
it into our git.
Best,
Lennox
2014-07-17 9:49 GMT+08:00 David Rientjes :
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, David Rientjes wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Chen Gang wr
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Chen Gang wrote:
>
> > 'COUNTER' and other same kind macros are too common to use, and easy to
> > get conflict with other modules.
> >
> > At present, they are not used, so it is OK to simply remove them. And the
> > related warn
On 06/27/2014 11:25 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 06/26/2014 07:47 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>> On 06/27/2014 10:11 AM, Lennox Wu wrote:
>>> Acked-by: Lennox Wu
>>>
>>
>> OK, thank, and excuse me, I am not quite familiar with the version
>> merging of upstream kernel: "who will apply it, next, if it is
On 06/26/2014 07:47 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
On 06/27/2014 10:11 AM, Lennox Wu wrote:
Acked-by: Lennox Wu
OK, thank, and excuse me, I am not quite familiar with the version
merging of upstream kernel: "who will apply it, next, if it is past all
reviewers' checking".
Normal procedure would be
On 06/27/2014 10:11 AM, Lennox Wu wrote:
> Acked-by: Lennox Wu
>
OK, thank, and excuse me, I am not quite familiar with the version
merging of upstream kernel: "who will apply it, next, if it is past all
reviewers' checking".
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Open, share, and attitude like air, water, an
Acked-by: Lennox Wu
2014-06-27 7:28 GMT+08:00 Chen Gang :
>
>
> On 06/27/2014 05:56 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Chen Gang wrote:
>>
>>> 'COUNTER' and other same kind macros are too common to use, and easy to
>>> get conflict with other modules.
>>>
>>> At present, they are n
On 06/27/2014 05:56 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Chen Gang wrote:
>
>> 'COUNTER' and other same kind macros are too common to use, and easy to
>> get conflict with other modules.
>>
>> At present, they are not used, so it is OK to simply remove them. And the
>> related warnin
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Chen Gang wrote:
> 'COUNTER' and other same kind macros are too common to use, and easy to
> get conflict with other modules.
>
> At present, they are not used, so it is OK to simply remove them. And the
> related warning (allmodconfig with score):
>
> CC [M] drivers/md
'COUNTER' and other same kind macros are too common to use, and easy to
get conflict with other modules.
At present, they are not used, so it is OK to simply remove them. And the
related warning (allmodconfig with score):
CC [M] drivers/md/raid1.o
In file included from drivers/md/raid1.c:4
13 matches
Mail list logo
