Re: Status of the patches under review (29 patches)

[Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>]

On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:10:16 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Hi Jean,
> 
> Jean Delvare wrote:
>  
> > I have 3 patches pending which aren't in your list. I can see them in
> > patchwork:
> > 
> > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/79755/
> > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/79754/
> > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/77349/
> > 
> > The former two are in "Accepted" state, and actually I received an
> > e-mail telling me they had been accepted, however I can't see them in
> > the hg repository. So where are they?
> 
> They are already on the git tree:
> 
> commit 2887117b31b77ebe5fb42f95ea8d77a3716b405b
> Author: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
> Date:   Tue Feb 16 14:22:37 2010 -0300
> 
>     V4L/DVB: bttv: Let the user disable IR support
>     
>     Add a new module parameter "disable_ir" to disable IR support. Several
>     other drivers do that already, and this can be very handy for
>     debugging purposes.
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
>     Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
> 
> commit e151340a2a9e7147eb48114af0381122130266b0
> Author: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
> Date:   Fri Feb 19 00:18:41 2010 -0300
> 
>     V4L/DVB: bttv: Move I2C IR initialization
>     
>     Move I2C IR initialization from just after I2C bus setup to right
>     before non-I2C IR initialization. This avoids the case where an I2C IR
>     device is blocking audio support (at least the PV951 suffers from
>     this). It is also more logical to group IR support together,
>     regardless of the connectivity.
>     
>     This fixes bug #15184:
>     http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15184
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
>     CC: stable@kernel.org
>     Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@redhat.com>
> 
> As patches in -hg are manually backported, maybe Douglas
> haven't backported it yet or he simply missed.
> 
> Douglas, could you please check this?

Ah, my bad. I totally missed that you had moved from hg to git for the
main development tree. I was still pulling from hg and basing my
patches on it. I will clone the git tree now, sorry for the confusion.

> > The latter is in "Not Applicable" state, and I have no idea what it
> > means. The patch is really simple and I see no formatting issue. Should
> > I just resend it?
> 
> This means that this patch is not applicable on -git. There's no versions.txt
> upstream. All patches that don't have upstream code are marked as such on
> patchwork. I generally ping Douglas on such cases, for him to double check on
> -hg.
> 
> Anyway, the better is to c/c to Douglas on all patches that are meant only
> to the building system.
> 
> Douglas, could you please check if you've applied this patch?

Thanks Douglas.

-- 
Jean Delvare