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=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS 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 271DAC54EEB for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 09:08:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 007E6205ED for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 09:08:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="kyRO1JZ5" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727130AbgCXJI0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 05:08:26 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f67.google.com ([209.85.167.67]:44118 "EHLO mail-lf1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727031AbgCXJIZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 05:08:25 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f67.google.com with SMTP id j188so8691683lfj.11 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 02:08:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kJjJYByf6BtkCJbFvGT1Wd2744n9maPiNNsg/rq8ckk=; b=kyRO1JZ5btzO7Wk7jEHMzvkhaqanVGbfUsMSVXHo1JQkUfXGH0UucI4wvLK+d/OfnP gEg5ikEIToTqf/va0lDUheAVTsNC5FQraX+B0DYs4in0K6/NOnB3jmt/gProtDRvjy7T 9IUsvGSTSTu3IM7geOL2xDQJOLMsoYm/XQTMOI+Oar+MM71VSTca5jvPzcO4pKF6zm+S Adbj2kQMYSsTtB305PlY/v6KCNQTmi0n+f8TSM1e1AccluodIT2J+tB4RTYc3hkwiJGu ug4J30VUr2i7a0hdT8L+LdjIVnIwzgQ0rm2cMg3fZHHaZ2GjoNfxYKltpjjONFM+R+it 0K9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kJjJYByf6BtkCJbFvGT1Wd2744n9maPiNNsg/rq8ckk=; b=nwUK7Ybj+zX5wunezA0K6T4CSN/55ncCtaknOVCuqp/IPh7QlXO6UTD8DbpCIQe5QQ oINbvxp+BRwE2KUjK9n1BCFLoIJQtxuDUwHtvkzC576ETEwiyyAEeO4ReYTcz0Yv6ROq Qh+KKzwBaS489mj0Qcw5dbUq/BP5jlpaK9ZqqI1J3rEmEBmGjmeMJRy2/LaERZoFfQH1 jfmIon5sIK2YnxeS1HBSNqaDmPbzqcpOO8j4mOgeySutkjZFDuN8yOmPbKxINIXRBCIJ YtPVndrjau9qWTejjkYnxRa344o37M8/TmN0qh38PFnK9mQ9BR7ub/Mn6Q+6KNmcvJZh 4vlQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1bbgS2Pkmkpq1hengf0tFPQIeMibfsOiwrX31QrdISaU8pkwcA wz1br6T6K1lviYYn4zkQbUDS3YbJigt6p+eEKJMlxg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuWsj1UB/YxRXzueomlYjoYqG09H4oLCgsWmCT4taWy0O5Fvu6P0MGC77ngiQ9gNR+bMULMKd/vy4uA+YtYTmU= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5f7c:: with SMTP id c28mr2775902lfc.4.1585040903033; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 02:08:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200321162707.5f4b1951@canb.auug.org.au> <2195891d-4f41-a4e9-c067-2f2b556a1517@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <2195891d-4f41-a4e9-c067-2f2b556a1517@redhat.com> From: Linus Walleij Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 10:08:12 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: Fixes tag needs some work in the gpio tree To: Hans de Goede Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 4:09 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > On 3/21/20 6:27 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > In commit > > > > 1b26f3ba6117 ("gpiolib: acpi: Add quirk to ignore EC wakeups on HP x2 10 CHT + AXP288 model") > > > > Fixes tag > > > > Fixes: aa23ca3d98f7 ("gpiolib: acpi: Add honor_wakeup module-option + quirk mech > > I see in my personal tree that I introduced this broken tag, sorry about > that. Linus, if you are ok with doing a forced push to fix it up then > the correct tag should be: > > Fixes: aa23ca3d98f7 ("gpiolib: acpi: Add honor_wakeup module-option + quirk mechanism") > > OTOH if you dislike forced pushes (which I completely understand) > then we will just have to live with the broken tag. I fixed it up! Actually I don't dislike rebasing patches on the fixes branch at all. The devel branch (for next) is much more sensitive. Yours, Linus Walleij