On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 05:21:35PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > On 03/24/2015 02:44 PM, Jani Nikula wrote: > >On Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>On 03/24/2015 01:16 PM, Jani Nikula wrote: > >>>On Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >>>>It should have been negative since it is returned with ERR_PTR(). > >>> > >>>Please always reference the commit that introduced the issue. > >> > >>Is there some more precisely defined criteria for "always"? > > > >Always when you fix a bug that was introduced by another commit? > > > >I need the commit reference to check if I need to queue the fix to > >current development kernel (i.e. v4.0-rcN). > > > >If someone backports the commit, it's easier to check if the commit is > >referenced by a later commit potentially fixing issues in it. > > Sure, but all bugs are introduced by other commits. So my question was only > along those lines, nothing more than that. In that sense it's an always always. If you don't maintainers have to do this, and that usually means more errors and screwups. Jani&I are bringing this up since we're just going through some fireworks because of this. For similar reasons you should also always cc the author/reviewers of the offending commit. Not a lot of people read all of intel-gfx, cc'ing relevant people is therefore important to keep everyone in the loop. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
