On 16/06/16 17:36, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Mark Rutland <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 05:25:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: >>> I noticed that there was an ack on v1 form Marc Z that's missing in v2. >> >> I believe Marc's reply [1] was to v3 [2], it's just that the version was >> missing form the subject, and discussions continued on v2 in the mean >> time.
Ah, that's what happened... > Yes, this is correct. >>> Maybe it no longer applies, I can't tell, but I usually expect >>> subsequent versions of a patch to include all the previously given acks >>> (of course, if they still apply, sometimes a patch rewrite means >>> dropping those tags). >> >> I guess the simplest thing to do is for Alexander to send a v4 with the >> tags accumulated, assuming James's Tested-by is applicable to v3 with >> the boot/Makefile hunk removed. James? > I think it's safe to assume James's Tested-by is still valid, as > boot/Makefile hunk did virtually nothing. I agree! > I'll send the new patch version now. Thanks, James
