On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 01:47 -0500, Len Brown wrote: > Piotr, > Thanks for sending the patch, I've made this change to my turbostat > branch for 4.10. > > I did not apply your patch directly because for some reason it didn't > appear in patchwork for linux-pm, > only for lkml, which I do not review.
The missing from linux-pm was my mistake due to lack of experience and perspicacity; I did not add the linux-pm list to cc because I could not find an entry for turbostat on MAINTAINERS file. Probably, it is mentioned implicitly but I did not come across it. > > Also, your patch depended on your style update patch to use the model > # macros. > Unfortunately what you did not know was that I'd already applied a > slightly different style update patch. > (and it was my fault that I did not push it upstream before my summer > sabbatical, sorry) NP, this was an easy change made automatically by my script. > > In general, though, a good strategy when mixing style and > functionality patches > is to do the functionality first. The reason is both that style > patches tend to conflict more, > and you don't want them to hold up the functionality. > Also, if your functionality patch does not depend on style, > it is easier to backport to distros who avoid style updates. Thanks for the tip. However, in this case, I got comments to use the macros instead raw numbers in my patch and remove unnecessary comments. It caused that the style patch came first. Thanks Piotr
