From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1OtaAi-0003Qr-EV for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 05:59:47 +0000 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) References: <20100909013546.GD5783@verge.net.au> <20100909024213.GC19303@verge.net.au> Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 22:59:33 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20100909024213.GC19303@verge.net.au> (Simon Horman's message of "Thu, 9 Sep 2010 11:42:13 +0900") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull x86 biarch crashdump support and misc devel List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kexec-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Simon Horman Cc: Kexec Mailing List Simon Horman writes: > I'd rather edit the patch to avoid breaking bisection. > Is that ok with you? No real problem, and my patchset is just intrusive enough someone might care and try and bisect a problem. In general I wouldn't fix that patch (after I had made it public) and would simply send a correcting patch because it can quickly become confusing, which patch should go where when. Here I don't think there is any danger of confusion so I don't think that changing history that has only been on my devel branch is worth worrying about. Eric _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec