From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6EFDC3A59E for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:44:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E0A222DA8 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:44:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=st.com header.i=@st.com header.b="s7risFeS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730877AbfHZJod (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 05:44:33 -0400 Received: from mx07-00178001.pphosted.com ([62.209.51.94]:31972 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726266AbfHZJod (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 05:44:33 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046668.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x7Q9flPh019662; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 11:44:10 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=st.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=STMicroelectronics; bh=VTmTOEmJtBhkUABaG/XSF9y7CY7sNsb6fCHiw63nQjM=; b=s7risFeSlR3qAFh9zk6ZVfvYjWJzNQfjHqNtgkWelXFWXeLacjP9j6QoUQPKzpUC7HE2 FXbCdpkCNBG7VaFodiobUYUMlvq1tD242iFIxBuzUkucS+qiesrMfXOCCvpemIYPsiai NWSWOXJ7KwUverZ5yXaO9SFyi5KkJmQMbbbDXpitPqHUdsTLJKJKmYyZunigA+XoSPll 2jDpdPuDFW1ggPgsvVJRo/2dSumFHpT5dexbo4LKVP9DYJOjk1eSwUJmYB7Bq5nJHE0/ zJYfz6ioajIH7AgiMBVf6gPG+TvcNQ6Pz0iAOqVsqbMcwhEVbvX/EjF122kMLrR+NjAo qg== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2ujtq1314w-1 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 11:44:10 +0200 Received: from euls16034.sgp.st.com (euls16034.sgp.st.com [10.75.44.20]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id DA5A231; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:44:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag3node2.st.com [10.75.127.8]) by euls16034.sgp.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id BFB2D2D49C0; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 11:44:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lmecxl0912.lme.st.com (10.75.127.46) by SFHDAG3NODE2.st.com (10.75.127.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1347.2; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 11:44:08 +0200 Subject: Re: linux-next: Fixes tags need some work in the arm-soc tree To: Stephen Rothwell , Arnd Bergmann CC: Olof Johansson , ARM , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Fabrice Gasnier References: <20190814002836.4b6aa14b@canb.auug.org.au> <20190814074730.402ec3ec@canb.auug.org.au> From: Alexandre Torgue Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 11:44:07 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190814074730.402ec3ec@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.46] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG8NODE2.st.com (10.75.127.23) To SFHDAG3NODE2.st.com (10.75.127.8) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-08-26_06:,, signatures=0 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org Hi guys On 8/13/19 11:47 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 21:35:58 +0200 Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:28 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >>> >>> Please do not split Fixes tags over more than one line. Also, please >>> keep them with the rest of the other tags. >> >> Thanks for the report. How bad is this? Should I undo the merge and >> wait for an updated pull request? > > Its probably ok to leave as long as lessons are learnt :-) > Sorry for my late answer. Thanks Stephen for information. I'll take care next time before merging patches with "fixes" tag. Arnd, no need to update the PR ? regards Alex