On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:06:53PM +0200, Andreas Steinmetz wrote: > [Please CC me on replies, I'm not subscribed] > > Here's a generic version that tries not to be intrusive. > > 1. sysfs interface that allows setting per port > 2. recycled an unused member of struct uart_port > > Attached patch is against linux-4.13. > -- > Andreas Steinmetz SPAMmers use robotrap@xxxxxxxx Hi, This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux kernel tree. You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s) as indicated below: - Your patch was attached, please place it inline so that it can be applied directly from the email message itself. - Your patch does not have a Signed-off-by: line. Please read the kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches and resend it after adding that line. Note, the line needs to be in the body of the email, before the patch, not at the bottom of the patch or in the email signature. - Your patch did many different things all at once, making it difficult to review. All Linux kernel patches need to only do one thing at a time. If you need to do multiple things (such as clean up all coding style issues in a file/driver), do it in a sequence of patches, each one doing only one thing. This will make it easier to review the patches to ensure that they are correct, and to help alleviate any merge issues that larger patches can cause. - Your patch did not apply to any known trees that Greg is in control of. Possibly this is because you made it against Linus's tree, not the linux-next tree, which is where all of the development for the next version of the kernel is at. Please refresh your patch against the linux-next tree, or even better yet, the development tree specified in the MAINTAINERS file for the subsystem you are submitting a patch for, and resend it. - You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or possibly, any description at all, in the email body. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what is needed in order to properly describe the change. - You did not write a descriptive Subject: for the patch, allowing Greg, and everyone else, to know what this patch is all about. Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what a proper Subject: line should look like. If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received from other developers. thanks, greg k-h's patch email bot -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
