On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:43:41AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:38:18AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Thierry Reding > > <thierry.red...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 09:06:14AM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote: > > >> drivers/pwm/pwm-stmpe.c:99:3-8: No need to set .owner here. The core > > >> will do it. > > >> > > >> Remove .owner field if calls are used which set it automatically > > >> > > >> Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/api/platform_no_drv_owner.cocci > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang...@intel.com> > > >> --- > > >> > > >> pwm-stmpe.c | 1 - > > >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > Erm... this driver doesn't exist in my tree. What's going on? > > > > What's going on is that the 0day build robot builds everything it > > finds, including experimental branches. > > > > I dunno why it's mailing you though, probably I already added your > > CC on the patch... stupid me. A bit much to think of. > > I guess the robot generates this patch and then runs get_maintainers.pl > on it, so it's doing the right thing. Anyway, I'll know to ignore these > in the future if drivers aren't in my tree yet.
Sorry I've added some heuristics to avoid adding CC from get_maintainers.pl for the likely private branches. It should reduce such confusions and noises considerably in future. Thanks, Fengguang -- 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/
