On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 1:31:22 PM CEST Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 01:06:40PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 12:38:02 PM CEST Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 01:13:54PM +0300, Pavel Skripkin wrote: > > > > Both series are pending right now and made on top of staging-next branch. > > > > Who needs to rebase? I think, applying these series as-is can broke the > > > > driver, since error handling will be broken > > > > > > That's a bug then. The patch should be rejected. You're not allowed to > > > break the code. > > > > Sorry Dan, I disagree. It's not a bug. No one intend to break the code. > > How could anyone know that someone else is working simultaneously on > > some code that is not compatible with the work of the other developer? > > Okay, I haven't been following the discussion closely. If these patches > introduce a known bug, then I am going to be cross. > > I'm really stressed out right now. If you at all suspect that your > patches are going to introduce bugs then just go back and say "Sorry, > don't take this one, the way it conflicts with Pavel's ends up > introducing a bug. I'll resend after Pavel's patches are applied." > > regards, > dan carpenter > Dear Dan, Yours is a nice solution to this problem. I had thought that I should have waited for Greg to ask to take into account Pavel's series, change some lines of his code (because they are the only users of the new version of the helper function, that is my work - as suggested by Greg himself), rebase and resend, I really think that your idea is better. I'll do as you suggest ASAP, within the end of the day (now I have to go). Thanks very much. Fabio
