Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Cleanups in "next" tree | From | Dan Murphy <> | Date | Fri, 3 Apr 2020 14:07:57 -0500 |
| |
Pavel
On 4/3/20 1:45 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > On 4/3/20 12:57 AM, Pavel Machek wrote: >> On Sun 2020-03-22 14:35:56, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: >>> Hi Pavel, >>> >>> On 3/22/20 12:59 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> I've commited some cleanups into LED tree ( git/pavel/linux-leds.git >>>> branch for-next ), if someone wants to review them. >>> You abused your maintainer power by bypassing the usual patch >>> submission procedure. Please remove the patches from linux-next >>> and submit them officially for discussion. I would have some objections >>> to them. >> I'm sorry I failed to meet your high expectations... But I don't >> believe I done anything completely outside of usual kernel procedures. > I believe code review is quite usual kernel procedure. > >> Could you list the patches and objections you have? > I already expressed my concerns regarding Turris Omnia patch. > > My comments regarding remaining patches: > > - "Make label "white:power" to be consistent with" > > I disagree here. "system" was OK. > > - "Warn about old defines that probably should not be used." > > Obsolete is only LED_FULL, so the comment is in wrong line
I would prefer to have the commit sha that obsoleted the LED_FULL to be referenced in the commit message so we have traceability.
Dan
| |