From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: linux-next submission requirements (Was: [RFC PATCH] linker script: unify usage of discard definition) Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:18:02 +0900 Message-ID: <4A4EC9EA.9070005@kernel.org> References: <4A4E9638.20304@kernel.org> <20090704113448.49a722d2.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:48233 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752824AbZGDDQH (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2009 23:16:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090704113448.49a722d2.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel , linux-next@vger.kernel.org Hello, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Tejun, > > [This is not aimed just at you ... this patch just gave me an > opportunity to point this out again.] > > On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 08:37:28 +0900 Tejun Heo wrote: >> This patch is on top of the current percpu#for-next. >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/percpu.git for-next >> >> Thanks. >> >> NOT_SIGNED_OFF_YET > > Well, given no SOB and that this is a RFC patch, it should *not* be in a > branch that is pulled into linux-next. It's not _in_ the branch. It's on _top_ of the branch. Thanks. -- tejun