Re: WTF: patch "[PATCH] drm/i915: Fix init_clock_gating for resume" was seriously submitted to be applied to the 4.14-stable tree?

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 08:18:47PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 10:45:50AM -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> >> - What was the reason that you used the "WTF - never to be seen again" tone
> >>   instead of the regular "FAILED - if someone wants to apply..."? Or in other
> >>   words, what can we do to improve and not make you angry again?
> >
> > First off, the WTF is just an email script, don't take it personally.
> 
> Jumping in here - tune it down a bit so it's less confusing? I guess
> in general it's not all that confusing, but since we did upset you
> rather badly a few months ago it's easy to jump to conclusions here
> and assume that i915 maintainers once more upset Greg badly :-/

Well, I'm ignoring the 10+ patches that I had to drop because I had
duplicates already applied, that did make me grumpy, but I'll live with
it for now...

> Just an idea in the spirit of the "make the bots friendlier"
> discussion from iirc kernel summit.

Normally, the script here is correct, it is rare that this type of
failure happens (dependancy on a patch that failed).  In fact, I think
it's the first time...

thanks,

greg k-h