From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932266AbaE1QBX (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2014 12:01:23 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.11.231]:40161 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932144AbaE1QBV (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2014 12:01:21 -0400 Message-ID: <5386084A.6030003@codeaurora.org> Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 21:31:14 +0530 From: Sujit Reddy Thumma User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131118 Thunderbird/17.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Hellwig CC: James Bottomley , Hannes Reinecke , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] scsi patch queue tree References: <20140519140614.GA12183@infradead.org> <20140520100343.31490551@canb.auug.org.au> <20140520053928.GA1751@infradead.org> <20140521094636.515289e8@canb.auug.org.au> <1400639101.2481.19.camel@dabdike> <20140528105429.GA20549@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20140528105429.GA20549@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/28/2014 4:24 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I've pushed the following changes to the drivers-for-3.16 tree. I've > there's anyting matching the rules that I did forget please resend > and/or ping me. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Benoit Taine (2): > qla4xxx: Use kmemdup instead of kmalloc + memcpy > qla2xxx: Use kmemdup instead of kmalloc + memcpy > > Dan Carpenter (1): > qla2xxx: fix incorrect debug printk > > Dolev Raviv (4): > scsi: ufs: query descriptor API > scsi: ufs: device query status and size check > scsi: ufs: Logical Unit (LU) command queue depth > scsi: ufs: Fix queue depth handling for best effort cases The above 4 patches are just posted to mailing lists with no review/ack's yet. I believe it still went in because the sender has modified the author name to himself and signed-off by is present by the original author which worked as a positive review for your rules. I have asked the sender to check why the original author name is changed. Meanwhile, I believe these patches should get some more time for review. -- Regards, Sujit