From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@bootlin.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 17:52:01 +0200 Subject: [GIT PULL] Allwinner H3/H5 changes for 4.20, bis In-Reply-To: References: <20181004193630.lbxyiecochf5cdfq@flea> Message-ID: <20181005155201.que3qp6ljyd7f74m@flea> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi! On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 05:43:03PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:36 PM Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > Hi Arnd, Olof, > > > > Here is a second attempt at the previous PR for the H3 and H5 changes, > > hopefully with the right SoB this time. It replaces the previous one. > > I'm not completely sure about this, we generally try not to rebase the > branches, and the previous version is now deep in the git history of the > next/dt branch. > > Obviously having a missing signoff is also bad, but I think keeping > the old version of your branch is better in this case. Merging the > new branch on top of next/dt would give us a proper signoff chain on > each patch, but would not remove the patches with the missing > signoff. Instead we'd have lots of duplicate commits, which is probably > worse. I definitely understand that. The issue went since Chen-Yu was the initial committer, but due to last minute issues in some patches in that branch, I rebased it to drop those patches and sent it. So commits carrying Chen-Yu's SoB were now committed by me. I'm not sure if it makes it better, but anyway... It's up to you, and sorry for that mess :/ Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: