On 07.09.2020 17:24, Kristof Havasi wrote:
Dear Ciubatariu,
as I am not familiar with the linux development workflow, I am contacting you directly as the author of the upstream patch: af199a1a9cb02ec0194804bd46c174b6db262075
I noticed that your addition there was applied twice into 5.4 [1]
d9b8206e5323ae3c9b5b4177478a1224108642f7 v5.4.51-45-gd9b8206e5323 d55dad8b1d893fae0c4e778abf2ace048bcbad86 v5.4.52-13-gd55dad8b1d89
resulting in a non-harmful, but unnecessary double setting of the variable.
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
return 0;
Could you notify the stable maintainers to apply your patch correctly?
Best regards, Kristóf Havasi
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/driver...
Hello,
Kristóf discovered that one patch of mine was applied twice. What is the best way to address this?
Thank you Kristóf for finding this.
Best regards, Codrin
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 05:15:49PM +0000, Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com wrote:
On 07.09.2020 17:24, Kristof Havasi wrote:
Dear Ciubatariu,
as I am not familiar with the linux development workflow, I am contacting you directly as the author of the upstream patch: af199a1a9cb02ec0194804bd46c174b6db262075
I noticed that your addition there was applied twice into 5.4 [1]
d9b8206e5323ae3c9b5b4177478a1224108642f7 v5.4.51-45-gd9b8206e5323 d55dad8b1d893fae0c4e778abf2ace048bcbad86 v5.4.52-13-gd55dad8b1d89
resulting in a non-harmful, but unnecessary double setting of the variable.
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
return 0;
Could you notify the stable maintainers to apply your patch correctly?
Best regards, Kristóf Havasi
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/driver...
Hello,
Kristóf discovered that one patch of mine was applied twice. What is the best way to address this?
Send us a revert would be best.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 07:31:54PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 05:15:49PM +0000, Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com wrote:
On 07.09.2020 17:24, Kristof Havasi wrote:
Dear Ciubatariu,
as I am not familiar with the linux development workflow, I am contacting you directly as the author of the upstream patch: af199a1a9cb02ec0194804bd46c174b6db262075
I noticed that your addition there was applied twice into 5.4 [1]
d9b8206e5323ae3c9b5b4177478a1224108642f7 v5.4.51-45-gd9b8206e5323 d55dad8b1d893fae0c4e778abf2ace048bcbad86 v5.4.52-13-gd55dad8b1d89
resulting in a non-harmful, but unnecessary double setting of the variable.
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
return 0;
Could you notify the stable maintainers to apply your patch correctly?
Best regards, Kristóf Havasi
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/driver...
Hello,
Kristóf discovered that one patch of mine was applied twice. What is the best way to address this?
Send us a revert would be best.
I'll queue up a revert, nothing else is required on your end, thanks for reporting!
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020 at 20:29, Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 07:31:54PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 05:15:49PM +0000, Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com wrote:
On 07.09.2020 17:24, Kristof Havasi wrote:
Dear Ciubatariu,
as I am not familiar with the linux development workflow, I am contacting you directly as the author of the upstream patch: af199a1a9cb02ec0194804bd46c174b6db262075
I noticed that your addition there was applied twice into 5.4 [1]
d9b8206e5323ae3c9b5b4177478a1224108642f7 v5.4.51-45-gd9b8206e5323 d55dad8b1d893fae0c4e778abf2ace048bcbad86 v5.4.52-13-gd55dad8b1d89
resulting in a non-harmful, but unnecessary double setting of the variable.
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
return 0;
Could you notify the stable maintainers to apply your patch correctly?
Best regards, Kristóf Havasi
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/driver...
Hello,
Kristóf discovered that one patch of mine was applied twice. What is the best way to address this?
Send us a revert would be best.
I'll queue up a revert, nothing else is required on your end, thanks for reporting!
-- Thanks, Sasha
Honestly, I am impressed how responsive this community is! Thank you for your responses!
On 07.09.2020 21:29, Sasha Levin wrote:
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 07:31:54PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 05:15:49PM +0000, Codrin.Ciubotariu@microchip.com wrote:
On 07.09.2020 17:24, Kristof Havasi wrote:
Dear Ciubatariu,
as I am not familiar with the linux development workflow, I am contacting you directly as the author of the upstream patch: af199a1a9cb02ec0194804bd46c174b6db262075
I noticed that your addition there was applied twice into 5.4 [1]
d9b8206e5323ae3c9b5b4177478a1224108642f7 v5.4.51-45-gd9b8206e5323 d55dad8b1d893fae0c4e778abf2ace048bcbad86 v5.4.52-13-gd55dad8b1d89
resulting in a non-harmful, but unnecessary double setting of the
variable.
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
/* set the real number of ports */ dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
return 0;
Could you notify the stable maintainers to apply your patch correctly?
Best regards, Kristóf Havasi
[1]
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/driver...
Hello,
Kristóf discovered that one patch of mine was applied twice. What is the best way to address this?
Send us a revert would be best.
I'll queue up a revert, nothing else is required on your end, thanks for reporting!
Great! Thanks everyone!
Best regards, Codrin
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Codrin.Ciubotariu＠microchip.com -
Greg KH -
Kristof Havasi -
Sasha Levin