From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:33:16 +0200 Subject: [media] s5p-mfc: Adjust a null pointer check in four functions In-Reply-To: References: <482a6c92-a85e-0bcd-edf7-3c2f63ea74c5@users.sourceforge.net> <6c2d20b3-4437-0473-73d4-73c049ba52a9@samsung.com> <0fa9a180-be67-3a33-682c-bff819c36c6a@samsung.com> <5b8eb902-d97c-3308-5ba9-64469320e0e2@users.sourceforge.net> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > Generating patch is only part of the story, I can follow this view in principle. > it seems the patch is not sent properly I got an other impression. > and tags which should be in SMTP header end up in the message body. I agree that extra message fields were presented by the git software for a reason. You might have got other opinions about the original reason (than me). > I think there would not be such issues if you have used git > format-patch + git send-email. I have got also doubts about your corresponding expectations when you would find the proposed commit message itself acceptable (besides the small source code changes). > I normally do amend things like this while applying, That is interesting. > I will do that this time as well. Such an action can also be nice. > It's already too much time wasted for such a dubious patch. A bit of time is needed to resolve a temporary disagreement. Regards, Markus