Re: linux-next: Fixes tags need some work in the watchdog tree

[Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>]

Hi All,

> Hi Stephan,
> 
> On 3. 01. 22 22:36, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >In commit
> >
> >   02d04e694fa3 ("watchdog: s3c2410: Fix getting the optional clock")
> >
> >Fixes tag
> >
> >   Fixes: a4f3dc8d5fbc ("watchdog: s3c2410: Support separate source clock")
> >
> >has these problem(s):
> >
> >   - Target SHA1 does not exist
> >
> >Maybe you meant
> >
> >Fixes: e249d01b5e8b ("watchdog: s3c2410: Support separate source clock")
> >
> >In commit
> >
> >   ce3401c72f01 ("watchdog: da9063: Add hard dependency on I2C")
> >
> >Fixes tag
> >
> >   Fixes: 5ea29919c294 ("watchdog: da9063: use atomic safe i2c transfer in reset handler")
> >
> >has these problem(s):
> >
> >   - Target SHA1 does not exist
> >
> >Maybe you meant
> >
> >Fixes: 968011a291f3 ("watchdog: da9063: use atomic safe i2c transfer in reset handler")
> >
> 
> Yes, that's probably right for my patch, sorry for that.
> 
> I was puzzled on where to get the SHA1 of not-yet applied commit,
> because this patches ("watchdog: da9063: use atomic safe i2c
> transfer in reset handler" and the fix "watchdog: da9063: Add hard
> dependency on I2C") followed quite closely together. Is there any
> way that I can get the SHA1 of the commit that was applied? It
> should be a part of some branch right? I'm asking because I couldn't
> find a repo or a branch that this two commits are a part of.
> 
> Anyway should I send a v2, or what is the procedure here?

I'll fix that.

Kind reards,
Wim.