On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 2018-01-13 at 12:53 +0100, Ognjen Galić wrote: >> > -#include <linux/kernel.h> >> > -#include <linux/module.h> >> > -#include <linux/types.h> >> > -#include <linux/jiffies.h> >> > #include <linux/async.h> >> > -#include <linux/dmi.h> >> > #include <linux/delay.h> >> > +#include <linux/dmi.h> >> > +#include <linux/jiffies.h> >> > +#include <linux/kernel.h> >> > +#include <linux/module.h> >> > #include <linux/slab.h> >> > #include <linux/suspend.h> >> > -#include <asm/unaligned.h> >> > +#include <linux/types.h> >> >> These changes completely break my patch: >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/ >> >> Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael >> about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch >> series does (like defining pr_fmt to shorten log prints) and this >> is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on >> conflicts compared to my series? > > Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael. Right, I still need to convince myself that the Ognjen's series actually works in all cases which I'm not quite sure about ATM. > The usual approach, how I understand the process, the first pushed is > first served, Right, and the first pushed one need not be the first submitted one, of course. > and a quite normal situation that the one, which had been > send later, comes to repository first. But see above, we definitely rely > on maintainer's decision here. > > P.S. AFAIU both series are rebased on top of linux-pm, correct? (At > least I'm sure about this one) I prefer stuff based on the Linus' tree, however, as that often makes it more straightforward to handle it for me. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
