On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Oops, that shouldn't have happened. Actually, our maintainer tooling
> ensures this doesn't happen, by auto-adding the committer sob line.
> But these patches (and a bunch of others pushed by Benjamin) haven't
> been pushed by our tooling it seems (the Link: tag is missing at
> least).
>
> Benjamin, what happened there?
Ok, figured it out, added another safety check to the scripting, and
hard-reset the tree. Unfortunately some of the patches already landed
in drm-next, so that needed a hard-reset too, plus in drm-intel-next,
where I still need to do the hard-reset. Ugh.
Benjamin: As part of the hard-reset I've thrown out all the patches
you've committed. That was simpler than digging out the right patches
from the rebase push. Please re-apply and push the right ones again.
My apologies for the hiccup, we maintainers (Dave, Sean & me) should
have caught this earlier.
Thanks, Daniel
>
> Thanks, Daniel
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I noticed a set of commits that have no Signed-off-by from their
>> committer:
>>
>> d9864a1d2dfc ("drm/stm: drv: Rename platform driver name")
>>
>> to
>>
>> ed34d261a12a ("drm/stm: dsi: Constify phy ops structure")
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell
>
>
>
> --
> 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
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
