On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 03:01:11PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Chris, > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:25 PM Chris Brandt <Chris.Brandt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thursday, July 26, 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > Thanks for your series! > > > > > > Unfortunately Greg has already applied your v1 (and my fix for a > > > use-after-free), so either these have to be reverted first, or you have to > > > rebase against tty-next. > > > > I assume you would prefer the newer implementation I did. > > > > In your opinion, which one would be better (revert or rebase)? > > [looking at the incremental differences] > > I think the easiest for Greg is to rebase, and send 3 patches: Greg does not rebase his public trees. Nor should anyone else :) I can revert patches if you want me to, just let me know what ones. Or send incremental patches on top of my tree please. But no reverts are going to be happening. thanks, greg k-h
