On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:06 AM, Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 31 May 2017 at 08:10, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> From: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> >>> Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 22:15:42 +0200 >>> >>>> If the e1000e maintainer wants to coalesce or not return statements >>>> this simple way, that's imo on him to change the color as needed. >>> >>> That's not how things work. >>> >>> If the maintainer wants you to style things a certain way, either you >>> do it that way or your patch isn't accepted. > > Consider this pull a regression report, pls handle it. And I guess I pile of more cc, to make this regression report complete. I mean you got the backtrace, bisect and a proposed fix, and the almost-whitespace change demanded is something gcc does in its sleep. I'd understand a request to retest if it would be a real functional change, but in this situation I have no idea why this regression just can't be fixed already. Not sure if it's really preferred if regression reports come incomplete, without bugfix and bisect attached. -Daniel >> I'm not really sure why Chris just couldn't respin already. >> >> Though really I think Chris should have just asked for a revert of the >> original patch that broke stuff, instead of trying to patch a driver >> if he doesn't have time to get the patch right for the maintainer. > > Ok, can we pls revert 2800209994f8 ("e1000e: Refactor PM flows") then? > > Thanks, Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel