> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:42:39 -0600 "Mike Miller (OS Dev)" <mikem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This patch supercedes yesterdays cciss-shutdown patch. The primary difference is > removing __devexit from cciss_remove_one. Instead of create another function I'd > rather use the code that was intended to perform the cleanup and cache flush. I've > tested as a loadable module and statically linked without error. > Please consider this for inclusion. Please don't document patches like this. The entirety of your changelog and the Subject: are relative to a patch which will never hit the mainline git tree. Put yourself in the position of someone reading the git changelogs in a year's time. They're going to be left scratching their heads at the above, aren't they? Always include a complete and standalone, not-referential-to-an-old-patch changelog in each iteration of a patch. Always choose a suitable Subject: Yes, it's good to tell us things about how this patch differs from the previous one. That info can be placed after the ^--- which comes after your signed-off-by:, or can be placed at the top of the email, as long as the full permanent changelog is there too. Bottom line: you are submitting code and its documentation into the permanent kernel record, not just the mailing list. Try to make it appropriate, thanks. Please send a new Subject: and changlog for this patch. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
