Hi, On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 11:19 PM, Ganapathi Bhat <gbhat@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Ganapathi Bhat >> > From: Brian Norris [mailto:briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx] >> > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 09:59:04AM +0000, Ganapathi Bhat wrote: >> > > > I can't find any commit with id c7dbdcb2a4e1, is it correct? >> > > Correct. Actually the commit id c7dbdcb2a4e1 is the PATCH [1/2] sent >> > > in this >> > series. >> > >> > What? Why would you introduce a bug and only fix it in the next patch? >> With the first patch the original issue took considerably longer time to >> recreate. Also it followed a different path to get recreated(shared in commit >> message). >> > Does that mean you should just combine the two? >> Let us know if that is fine to merge them. We can modify the commit >> message accordingly. >> > Or reverse the order, if patch 2 doesn't cause problems on its own? >> Patch 2 has a dependency on patch 1. > One correction. There is no commit dependency between patch 1 and 2(they can be applied in any order). But the result would be same. We need both fixes. Let us know if we can combine them. I haven't closely looked at patch 2 yet. My only statement was that it makes no sense to have 2 commits, with the second one labeled as "Fixing" the first one. From your descriptions, it sounds like patch 2 should actually come first, but I'm not really sure. I only looked far enough to say that I didn't like patch 1 as-is :) Brian
