On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 16:01:19 -0500 Josh Boyer <jwbo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:49:47AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > >On Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:40:41 -0800 > >Grant Erickson <gerick...@nuovations.com> wrote: > > > >> On 1/30/09 2:05 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:54:42 -0700 dougthomp...@xmission.com wrote: > >> >> From: Grant Erickson <gerick...@nuovations.com> > >> > > >> > Perhaps a powerpc mailing list should have been cc'ed? > >> > >> The first round patch went to Doug, the BlueSmoke (EDAC) mailing list and > >> the Linux/PowerPC mailing list. However, because the original patch was > >> split in two, subsequent revisions of just the EDAC piece went to Doug and > >> BlueSmoke. Doug then forwarded it to linux-kernel. > >> > >> What's the preferred sign-off, ACK chain for this subsystem? Through > >> PowerPC/4xx or PowerPC GIT upstream or through you and -mm upstream? > > > >I don't trust those guys ;) > > I might take offense to that, but it seems that there aren't too many people > in general that you trust, so I guess that's fine. ;) > > (And while you may or may not be joking, if there's something that I've done > to be considered not trustworthy then please let me know.) Every kernel cycle there are literally hundreds of patches which slip through subsystem tree maintainers' fingers. Patches which I unlose for them. Heaven knows how many patches get lost on mailing lists which I don't read. My mistrust is widespread and well-placed ;) > >I'd merge it via -mm, while cc'ing various random powerpc personalities. > > Erm, ok. Since there doesn't appear to be an EDAC git tree for -next I > guess that makes sense. I'll try to review the most recent version in the > next few days. Thanks. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
