Lee, On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 2:26 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: >> Lee (-others), > > Re-CC'ing the list. > >> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> From: Prathyush K <prathyus...@samsung.com> >> >> >> >> Set the device as wakeup capable and register the wakeup source. >> >> >> >> Note: Though it makes more sense to have the SPI framework do this, >> >> (either via device tree or by board_info) >> >> this change is as per an existing mail chain: >> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/27/291 >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Prathyush K <prathyus...@samsung.com> >> >> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <diand...@chromium.org> >> >> --- >> >> Note that I don't have suspend/resume actually working upstream, but I >> >> see that /sys/bus/spi/drivers/cros-ec-spi/spi2.0/power/wakeup exists >> >> with this patch and doesn't exist without it. >> > >> > Very well. Applied, thanks. >> >> Thanks for applying! ...did this go in some non-standard branch? I >> see another of my patches got committed to your "for-mfd-next" tree on >> the 19th but I don't see this one... > > Patience Grasshopper. When I say that it's applied, it means that I > have done so locally only. After I've collected a few local patches > I'll usually then fix them all with with my SoB and push them out to > the public MFD tree. > > BTW, it's always best to leave the ML in as CC, so others can see the > answer to these types of questions. It may save a few emails a year, > but every little helps. :)
Thanks! I know it's super hard to keep track of everything, so I figure that it's part of my job as a submitter to help maintainers keep track of my patches. I've definitely had many-a-time where someone has said "oops, I forgot about that" or where people were not on the same page about what the next steps ought to be. Sounds like I should perhaps tone back and wait a bit longer before I ping about things. Note: if there's any way you can provide more info to submitters like me then it would certainly be appreciated! In this case I was trying hard not to be a noob. I checked your public git tree and saw patches applied that were after the date you sent your last email and didn't see this patch. I definitely don't know your personal workflow, but it's good to know that didn't mean the patch was lost. A few things that would have kept me from sending an email: * If your email had read: "Applied to low priority fixes" and the other email had read "Applied to high priority fixes" then I would have understood that there were two queues and wouldn't have been concerned. * If you are able to publish (by pushing) your WIP collection to patches to git.kernel.org then I would be able to confirm myself that the patch wasn't lost. If your queue was named something like "WIP" then I would also have a good idea that inclusion in that queue isn't a guarantee that my patch would land in mainline and I would also be able to guess that git hashes were probably not stable there. ...anyway, as I said I will try to follow up less often and only ping if I see silence for > 2 weeks. :) -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/