From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753813AbdJNORy (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Oct 2017 10:17:54 -0400 Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:60778 "EHLO pandora.armlinux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753026AbdJNORx (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Oct 2017 10:17:53 -0400 Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 15:17:41 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Nicolas Pitre Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Arnd Bergmann , Ard Biesheuvel , Tony Lindgren , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux-Renesas , Chris Brandt , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: head-common.S: Clear lr before jumping to start_kernel() Message-ID: <20171014141740.GH23750@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> References: <1507044184-27152-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be> <20171010203324.GX4394@atomide.com> <20171012102341.GF23750@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> <20171014141405.GG23750@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20171014141405.GG23750@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 03:14:05PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:25:50AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > It should go into your devel-testing branch as this must be applied on > > top of my xip_zdata branch that you merged there. > > Thanks, it would've been good to have known that ahead of time. > > It's why the patch system has the KernelVersion: tag: > >  6. Kernel version. > On a separate line, add a tag "KernelVersion: " followed by the kernel > version that the patch was generated against. This should be formatted > as "KernelVersion: 2.6.0-rmk1" > > This is because that information is relevant for knowing where it should > be applied, and to which branch. Having it be something else means I > have to guess, and that can result in the patch being discarded in this > manner if I don't find where it's supposed to be applied. > > Yes, I know it's a pain to have to supply this information, but giving > accurate information there makes things a lot easier and quicker when > applying patches, rather than playing a game of "guess where it needs > to be applied, nope, doesn't apply there, try somewhere else." > > Various people in the kernel community have different solutions to this. > For example, on netdev, it is preferred to state whether you want your > patch to be applied to "net" or "net-next" by adding that into the > "[PATCH ...]" tag in the subject line. It's really about streamlining > the patch submission and application process. The tag can take a plain kernel version and a kernel version suffixed with a shortened git hash (please avoid the full hash, it doesn't display well with the web presentation, and will probably be truncated when it's inserted into the database.) -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up