From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.micronovasrl.com ([212.103.203.10]:36258 "EHLO mail.micronovasrl.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752884AbeFOUzD (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2018 16:55:03 -0400 Received: from mail.micronovasrl.com (mail.micronovasrl.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.micronovasrl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29EF8B008FE for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 22:55:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.micronovasrl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.micronovasrl.com (mail.micronovasrl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Cmvr3fHFWf73 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 22:55:00 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "drm/sun4i: Handle DRM_BUS_FLAG_PIXDATA_*EDGE" To: Paul Kocialkowski , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Maxime Ripard , David Airlie , Chen-Yu Tsai , linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com, stable@vger.kernel.org References: <20180613081647.31183-1-paul.kocialkowski@bootlin.com> <99b2583187fe9925251029e876b061aac9172597.camel@bootlin.com> From: Giulio Benetti Message-ID: <94a68af2-371f-d81e-b25d-31ae7869e98e@micronovasrl.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 22:54:57 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <99b2583187fe9925251029e876b061aac9172597.camel@bootlin.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: it Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Paul, Il 14/06/2018 09:26, Paul Kocialkowski ha scritto: > Hi, > > On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 23:52 +0200, Giulio Benetti wrote: >> Hello, >> >> sorry for my ignorance. >> I don't know the right patch workflow in the case of "revert commit". >> When I fix this bug, should I have to re-submit the previous patch >> entire plus bug-fix? >> >> Or do I have to submit patch with bug-fix only? > > Yes, that is usually how it works! The revert patch will be picked up by > the maintainer (Maxime), integrated in his tree and eventually merged > into Linus' tree (along with stable trees). > > Fixup patches for this will need to take into account the revert patch, > so it becomes equivalent to submitting the same patch with that issue > resolved. Thanks for explaining me. I'm going to submit new patch asap. Giulio