On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 05:07:35PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 01:09:18PM -0000, GitLab Bridge on behalf of pbrobinson wrote: > > > From: pbrobinson on gitlab.com > > > > > > Revert the old version of the patches, apply the latest upstream > > > version: > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > It looks like most of your patches are git cherry-picks? If so, just using > > 'git cherry-pick -x' records the commit sha from the submaintainers tree and > > satisfies Jiri's request. Hopefully that is an easy tweak to make??? > > Not that I'm aware of, they were from patchwork, they were a newer > version of a patch set we had already pulled in that I retrieved from > the arm-kernel list patchwork, we often do that on Arm on Fedora > around enablement of popular devices. Ah, ok. Yeah, I discussed with Justin awhile ago, about just taking patches for Fedora from folks he trusted were taking upstream committed patches because that is the speed Fedora is used to. I will chat with Red Hat folks about what can be done to not get in the way. In general the concern is to make sure non-upstream'd accepted patches get reviewed. So pointing to upstream commits is the easiest way to reduce that concern (at least submaintainer commit ids as those will be the same in Linus's tree). Yeah, I know your arm patches have zero effect on RHEL. Patchwork patches don't have those ids, but I would think they are in an arm-next branch or something?? I will work on some ideas to not negatively impact your contributions. Thanks! Cheers, Don _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
