On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 09:53:24AM +0100, Christian König wrote: > Am 24.01.2017 um 08:43 schrieb Nils Holland: > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:35:16AM +0900, Michel Dänzer wrote: > >> On 24/01/17 09:55 AM, Nils Holland wrote: > >>> So I decided to fix this with the following follow-up patch. I hope > >>> this is the right approach (vs. reverting the commit and instead using > >>> a fixed v2 of the original patch). > >>> > >>> From 41775d2c8a14873f522667a57b66cfbe119e28a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >>> From: Nils Holland <nholland at tisys.org> > >>> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 01:36:45 +0100 > >>> Subject: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Fix error in amdgpu_bo_create_restricted() > >> Note that the way your e-mail was formatted, the above commentary and > >> mail headers would end up in the Git commit log, unless the person > >> applying the patch pays attention and removes them. Commentary that > >> isn't to be part of the commit log should be added between the --- > >> marker below and the actual code diff. > > Ah, I see! Making the job unnecessarily difficult for a maintainer is > > no good idea, so I will certainly do this better / correctly the next > > time I submit something! > > > >> Reviewed-by: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer at amd.com> > > Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com> as well. Just a note: I've just had a look at the official amdgpu Git tree for the first time, and saw that when Alex Deucher commited my patch into drm-next-4.11-wip yesterday, he obviously already spotted the mistake and fixed it. That would mean that my follow-up patch is void and can be discarded. I should probably have verified the state of the patch in the tree before reacting to the kernel test robot's output (or, rather: Should have tested well enough to prevent this mistake right from the start...) Thanks Alex! Greetings Nils
