Re: [PATCH 0/8 v4] mpc83xx_wdt rework, support for mpc8610 and mpc8xx
On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 21:37:26 +0400 Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No comments on the previous version for two weeks... resending once > again. I did all the rework to make the patches apply on top of all the pending watchdog work in Wim's tree and in -mm. I haven't build tested it yet. I'll assume that [PATCH 7/8] [POWERPC] fsl_soc: remove mpc83xx_wdt code and [PATCH 8/8] [POWERPC] 86xx: mpc8610_hpcd: add watchdog node are dependent upon the preceding six patches. This might be wrong. Please put the subsystem identifier (eg, "watchdog" and "powerpc") outside the [], for reasons which should be in Documentation/SubmittingPatches, which used to be there but which got lost. Bascially the text inside [] is for temporary not-for-committing information such as "rfc", "2.6.24-rc4", "resend", etc and should be stripped by the email recipient before merging. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/8 v4] mpc83xx_wdt rework, support for mpc8610 and mpc8xx
On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 04:48:30PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 21:37:26 +0400 > Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > No comments on the previous version for two weeks... resending once > > again. > > I did all the rework to make the patches apply on top of all the > pending watchdog work in Wim's tree and in -mm. I haven't build tested > it yet. Thanks, I'll test it in run-time also. > I'll assume that > > [PATCH 7/8] [POWERPC] fsl_soc: remove mpc83xx_wdt code > > and > > [PATCH 8/8] [POWERPC] 86xx: mpc8610_hpcd: add watchdog node > > are dependent upon the preceding six patches. This might be wrong. This is correct. > Please put the subsystem identifier (eg, "watchdog" and "powerpc") > outside the [], for reasons which should be in > Documentation/SubmittingPatches, which used to be there but which got > lost. Bascially the text inside [] is for temporary not-for-committing > information such as "rfc", "2.6.24-rc4", "resend", etc and should be stripped > by the email recipient before merging. Yeah, I know. It is just hard to remember all the preferences. For example, PowerPC maintainers asking to do patches with "[POWERPC]" identifier, this identifier purposely keeps intact for git-log. -- Anton Vorontsov email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2 ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/8 v4] mpc83xx_wdt rework, support for mpc8610 and mpc8xx
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 04:17:39 +0400 Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Please put the subsystem identifier (eg, "watchdog" and "powerpc") > > outside the [], for reasons which should be in > > Documentation/SubmittingPatches, which used to be there but which got > > lost. Bascially the text inside [] is for temporary not-for-committing > > information such as "rfc", "2.6.24-rc4", "resend", etc and should be > > stripped > > by the email recipient before merging. > > Yeah, I know. It is just hard to remember all the preferences. > > For example, PowerPC maintainers asking to do patches with "[POWERPC]" > identifier, this identifier purposely keeps intact for git-log. Addition of "[powerpc]" if it was absent can be scripted. However, the retaining of "[powerpc]" (etc) while not retaining "[rfc]" (etc) is not practical. Plus putting things into git with "[powerpc]" in the title is wrong. The chances are good that anyone who is taking such a patch off the git-commits list (say, for a backport) will lose that part of the title. It should be "powerpc: " (http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/dh.gif) ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/8 v4] mpc83xx_wdt rework, support for mpc8610 and mpc8xx
Andrew Morton writes: > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 04:17:39 +0400 > Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Please put the subsystem identifier (eg, "watchdog" and "powerpc") > > > outside the [], for reasons which should be in > > > Documentation/SubmittingPatches, which used to be there but which got > > > lost. Bascially the text inside [] is for temporary not-for-committing > > > information such as "rfc", "2.6.24-rc4", "resend", etc and should be > > > stripped > > > by the email recipient before merging. > > > > Yeah, I know. It is just hard to remember all the preferences. > > > > For example, PowerPC maintainers asking to do patches with "[POWERPC]" > > identifier, this identifier purposely keeps intact for git-log. > > Addition of "[powerpc]" if it was absent can be scripted. > > However, the retaining of "[powerpc]" (etc) while not retaining "[rfc]" > (etc) is not practical. > > Plus putting things into git with "[powerpc]" in the title is wrong. > The chances are good that anyone who is taking such a patch off the > git-commits list (say, for a backport) will lose that part of the > title. It should be "powerpc: " I think Anton is confusing two things: (a) what should be in the subject line of a patch posted to a mailing list, and (b) what should be in the headline of a commit put into a git tree that I pull from. As for (a), people can put whatever they like in [], and if people put "powerpc:" in the subject, I edit it out since my scripts put [POWERPC] in the git commit headline. For (b), I ask git tree maintainers that I'm going to pull from to put [POWERPC] at the start of the headline for consistency with what I do. Looking at Linus' git tree, it's evident that some subsystems use the the "[SUBSYSTEM]" notation and some use "subsystem:". If there is now an edict from on high that only "subsystem:" is acceptable, then I must have missed that memo. Paul. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/8 v4] mpc83xx_wdt rework, support for mpc8610 and mpc8xx
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:07:20 +1000 Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Looking at Linus' git tree, it's evident that some subsystems use the > the "[SUBSYSTEM]" notation and some use "subsystem:". If there is now > an edict from on high that only "subsystem:" is acceptable, then I > must have missed that memo. I'm all edicted out. Sometimes one just puts forth the reasoning and lets others decide whether it's worth bothering about. I could understand that decision being "no" :) ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/8 v4] mpc83xx_wdt rework, support for mpc8610 and mpc8xx
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 02:07:20PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Andrew Morton writes: > > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 04:17:39 +0400 > > Anton Vorontsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Please put the subsystem identifier (eg, "watchdog" and "powerpc") > > > > outside the [], for reasons which should be in > > > > Documentation/SubmittingPatches, which used to be there but which got > > > > lost. Bascially the text inside [] is for temporary not-for-committing > > > > information such as "rfc", "2.6.24-rc4", "resend", etc and should be > > > > stripped > > > > by the email recipient before merging. > > > > > > Yeah, I know. It is just hard to remember all the preferences. > > > > > > For example, PowerPC maintainers asking to do patches with "[POWERPC]" > > > identifier, this identifier purposely keeps intact for git-log. > > > > Addition of "[powerpc]" if it was absent can be scripted. > > > > However, the retaining of "[powerpc]" (etc) while not retaining "[rfc]" > > (etc) is not practical. > > > > Plus putting things into git with "[powerpc]" in the title is wrong. > > The chances are good that anyone who is taking such a patch off the > > git-commits list (say, for a backport) will lose that part of the > > title. It should be "powerpc: " > > I think Anton is confusing two things: I found original email.. yes, you indeed ask for [POWERPC] in git trees. But. I believe anyone who send patches, tries to mimic existing practice, and thus please the maintainer. Personally, I'm doing git log subsystem/ and looking for the preferred format for the commit message. And I'm not alone: linuxppc-dev is full of [POWERPC] in the patch subjects, despite the fact that you didn't explicitly ask for it. Asking to send patches with "subsystem: " and then seeing them as "[SUBSYSTEM] " in git-log is more confusing. Since new authors will personalize this thinking: "Oh, maintainer fixed my negligence. Next time I should send a patch with [SUBSYSTEM]". -- Anton Vorontsov email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2 ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/8 v4] mpc83xx_wdt rework, support for mpc8610 and mpc8xx
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:15:30 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 14:07:20 +1000 Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Looking at Linus' git tree, it's evident that some subsystems use the > > the "[SUBSYSTEM]" notation and some use "subsystem:". If there is now > > an edict from on high that only "subsystem:" is acceptable, then I > > must have missed that memo. > > I'm all edicted out. Sometimes one just puts forth the reasoning and > lets others decide whether it's worth bothering about. I could understand > that decision being "no" :) Well, it would be a Good Thing if all subsystem/arch maintainers would do it in the same format, whatever that format is. --- ~Randy "It's the Government of the United States." ... The largest, and yet the least efficient, producer of computer software in the world. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
