From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/3] ACPI based I/O APIC hot-plug
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 19:20:10 +0900
Message-ID: <426E15DA.9030800@jp.fujitsu.com>
References: <4267AD0E.3080006@jp.fujitsu.com> <20050426025716.142c5726.akpm@osdl.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-ia64-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050426025716.142c5726.akpm@osdl.org>
Sender: linux-ia64-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: len.brown@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, greg@kroah.com, acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, pcihpd-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org

Andrew Morton wrote:
> "Kenji Kaneshige" <kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
>>Here is a set of patches to support ACPI based I/O APIC hotplug.
> 
> 
> OK, with the help of Tony's git tree I managed to get those merged up.
> 

Wow, great!
But I'm now updating these patches based on the feedbacks.
How should I do about this? Should I send these updates as
another cleanup patch?


> In future, please avoid sending multiple patches with the same Subject:? 
> Because when you do that I have to invent unique names for the patches and
> you don't know what those names were, so things get confusing.  See
> http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/tpp.txt for more, thanks.
> 

Sorry about that.
I'll see this.

Thanks,
Kenji Kaneshige