On Fri, 05 Aug 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > I'm unsure if you're not re-submitting because you're waiting for an > > answer for me or not. > > I found your five commits (on 2016-06-29) for this patch series > sufficient in principle. > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=d313cdde71ec9a5c327a515c37a0dca2cca00de5 > > > > If you are, here it is. And, don't do that. :) > > I find this feedback a bit strange. > > > > Please submit your patch-set *not* connected to this, now very > > tangled web of submissions, complete with all the Acks you've > > accrued. > > I would find it nice if another one of my update suggestions > could be integrated after a bit of feedback evolved for a special > source code search pattern. > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9199519/ > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9208925/ > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9210291/ > > It seems to be harder to achieve acceptance similar to the others. I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say. Please rebase all of your unaccepted patches on v4.8-rc1. Apply any Acks that you've collected along the way and re-submit the set. Please ensure, when you re-submit, you do so using `git format-patch` and `git send-email`. Also ensure you do not send them attached to any other patch that you've previously sent. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
