Re: [PATCH v2 4/9] staging: panel: Use defined value or checking module params state

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 07:24:17AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:26:59PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 01:58:01PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 09:38:46PM +0100, Mariusz Gorski wrote:
> > > > Avoid magic number and use a comparison with a defined value instead
> > > > that checks whether module param has been set by the user to some
> > > > value at loading time.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mariusz Gorski <marius.gorski@gmail.com>
> > > > Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
> > > > ---
> > > > v2: Don't introduce new macros for param value check
> > > > 
> > > >  drivers/staging/panel/panel.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> > > >  1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > Ugh, I messed up here, and applied the first series, which was acked.
> > > 
> > > Mariusz, can you resend the patches that I didn't apply, I can't seem to
> > > get the rest of these to work properly.
> > 
> > Greg, if I get you here correctly, you've applied all 9 patches from v1
> > and none from v2, so what you need now is a v1->v2 patch, right?
> 
> No, I think I applied the patches sent _before_ the 9 series, it was 4
> or 5 or so, you should have gotten an email about them.  Pull my
> staging-testing branch and redo your remaining patches please.

And the reason I got confused was because you didn't label your second
set of patches "v2", which it was, I saw two separate series, one with a
few patches, and then 2 sets of 9, the second set labeled "v2" so I
thought they were independant.  Please think of the poor maintainer who
has to decipher things like this when you send them out...

thanks,

greg k-h