On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> The changelog for [PATCH v8 04/16] is misleading - we don't need any >> >> modification for the reason mentioned in changelog. But the modification >> >> has positive side-effect of preventing callbacks during terminate_all which >> >> is no way understood from the changelog. So I would like to changelog >> >> corrected. >> > I thought change log was correct in depicting what patch does and Boojin >> > had replied.... I will check again... >> >> I didn't reply because I ran out of ways to explain the same thing in >> different words. > I checked again the patch, change log and your comments. > I agree with current change log, and also your observation is right but > that is just a side effect, It is not "just a side effect", it is "the only tangible effect". If it were not for this 'side-effect', the patch would be _purely_ cosmetic rearrangement. The _only_ difference seen would be by clients who would no longer have callbacks when they issue terminate_all. And I don't think that is expected at all reading the changelog in current form. > So no changes to this and I a ready to merge it to my next in a day or > two... I guess the world isn't gonna come to grinding halt with this changelog. Please feel free to do what you think is the best. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |