[GIT PULL] DaVinci fixes for v3.13-rc3

Sekhar Nori nsekhar at ti.com
Wed Dec 4 17:43:35 EST 2013


+ Peter

Hi Olof,

On 12/5/2013 4:03 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Pulled.
> 
> A suggestion for the future, please try to use a patch description
> that doesn't require you to motivate why this is needed now. I.e. the
> patch description should contain:
> 
> What is broken
> How/when it broke (SHA or general timeframe)
> How it's fixed
> 
> In this case, it wasn't obvious what the actual breakage was (i.e.
> audio not working), nor when it was introduced.
> 
> Of course, if something is trivial you don't need to fill it in, nor
> should it be a form-based description. But those three answers should
> generally be possible to find in the patch description for a bugfix.

Yes, understood. I generally do push back on this and this time I (quite
unnecessarily) tried supplementing the information missing in
description through the tag signing message. Should have made sure the
commit description has the required information instead.

Thanks,
Sekhar



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list