From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Make the managed clk functions generically available Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 01:39:13 +0100 Message-ID: <20120910003913.GM13739@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1347202862-1617-1-git-send-email-lars@metafoo.de> <20120909235059.GA2643@sirena.org.uk> <20120910001524.GL13739@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120910002020.GB16249@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120910002020.GB16249@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen , Mike Turquette , Greg Ungerer , Julia Lawall , Artem Bityutskiy , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 08:20:21AM +0800, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 01:15:24AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > Note that the patch system doesn't always return error messages anymore > > (it used to do that reliably, but as it's now a favourite target for > > spammers and was creating soo much backscatter, which was then filling > > my mailbox with bounces... that had to change.) > > Hrm, that's not ideal. It'd be nice if it were able to do something > like always reply if there were patch contents, or if it found things > like the KernelVersion line in there. Obviously e-mail is also not time > guaranteed so deciding it's not responded (and then working out why it > did that) is going to be unreliable too. It tries to - if it finds what it thinks is a patch in the right place in the email. If it doesn't think it found a patch then it won't reply. In other words, if you include a patch without a PATCH FOLLOWS or the --- commit message/diffstat break marker preceding it, it will ignore you. > I do recall seeing the patch in the database but it's not showing up any > more so perhaps I was thinking of a different patch. Well, no patch ever gets deleted from the database... the only way even I can do that is to manually issue the SQL. > OK, that's what I'd thought was going on - it was the fact that you'd > just acked the patch rather than asked for it to go to the patch tracker > or something which made me wonder if things had changed. I kind'a forgot because it's been soo long since I took any of those patches...