On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 10:16:36AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:16:50PM -0500, Michael Welling wrote: > >> Recently my patch was found to be a duplicated in the gpio > >> tree during a manual merge with linux-next. > >> > >> The patch was similar but not identical and it was smoothed out by Stephen > >> Rothwell. > >> > >> Though I did found a bit of redundant code in the Linux next version. > >> > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/197 > >> > >> I am willing to recreate the patch but I am wondering if I should > >> model it after my original patch or after the merged version in > >> linux-next. > >> > >> Suggestions? > > > > I'll defer to the gpio maintainer, he would know what's best to do here. > > First fix the code that has landed upstream to look like you > want it, then submit a squashed combined version that looks > like you want it. No, I don't like squashed patches, just send both of them backported properly. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html