From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:55554 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751076AbdHQLAf (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:00:35 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v7HAwjZP124600 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:00:35 -0400 Received: from e23smtp03.au.ibm.com (e23smtp03.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.145]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2cd8npb605-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:00:35 -0400 Received: from localhost by e23smtp03.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 21:00:31 +1000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] libfs: define simple_read_iter_from_buffer From: Mimi Zohar To: James Morris Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Matthew Garrett , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Garrett Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 07:00:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <1502808237-2035-1-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1502808237-2035-2-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20170816063508.GA16683@lst.de> <1502905386.21278.2.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <1502967617.21278.68.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2017-08-17 at 12:42 +1000, James Morris wrote: > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 08:35 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Looks good, > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig > > > > Thank you for the reviewed-by's. > > > > Up to now I haven't been removing the Changelog before sending James a > > pull request.  Adding the dashes in the commit itself, only changes > > how the patches are applied by others to their local branch, not to > > what would be upstreamed.  Am I suppose to be removing the changelog > > before sending a pull request? > > I don't really understand this, but leave the changelog in? Christoph had commented that the "---" should be before the Changelog, not afterwards, so that git-am skips them.  The changelog is needed by reviewers, but once upstreamed it isn't really needed any more.  Based on Christph's response (offline), any information in the changelog that is still useful, should move into the commit description itself or code. Mimi