From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gregkh at linuxfoundation.org (Greg KH) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 08:28:15 +0200 Subject: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH] staging: rtl8732bs: replace symbolic permission with octal permission In-Reply-To: <20190622053358.5832-1-sushmaunnibhavi425@gmail.com> References: <20190622053358.5832-1-sushmaunnibhavi425@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190622062815.GA6089@kroah.com> List-Id: On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:03:58AM +0530, Sushma Unnibhavi wrote: > Resolved following checkpatch issue: > WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IXUGO' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0111' > > Signed-off-by: Sushma Unnibhavi > --- > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/os_dep/rtw_proc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Is this a "v2" patch? If so, you always have to say that as per the kernel documentation and put what changed below the --- line. Also, you can not send patches based on top of a previous patch, unless that patch was accepted. And I don't think I accepted your previous patch, right? thanks, greg k-h From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg KH) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 08:28:15 +0200 Subject: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH] staging: rtl8732bs: replace symbolic permission with octal permission In-Reply-To: <20190622053358.5832-1-sushmaunnibhavi425@gmail.com> References: <20190622053358.5832-1-sushmaunnibhavi425@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20190622062815.GA6089@kroah.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <20190622062815.MCMdBxjYsyy_D32Zwb15lbuLBRF7rTivEgdRrf5hmiQ@z> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:03:58AM +0530, Sushma Unnibhavi wrote: > Resolved following checkpatch issue: > WARNING: Symbolic permissions 'S_IXUGO' are not preferred. Consider using octal permissions '0111' > > Signed-off-by: Sushma Unnibhavi > --- > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/os_dep/rtw_proc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Is this a "v2" patch? If so, you always have to say that as per the kernel documentation and put what changed below the --- line. Also, you can not send patches based on top of a previous patch, unless that patch was accepted. And I don't think I accepted your previous patch, right? thanks, greg k-h