Re: [PATCH 0/4] PM: Do not destroy/create devices while suspended(rev. 2)

[Alan Stern]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Greg KH wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 04:49:04PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:

> > err, no.  pm-introduce-destroy_suspended_device.patch demolishes
> > pm-acquire-device-locks-on-suspend-rev-3.patch
> > 
> > Confused, giving up.
> 
> I'm confused too, I have no idea what the proper order of things should
> be either.  Anyone want to give me a hint?

Sorry for the confusion.  The correct patch to apply is 
pm-acquire-device-locks-on-suspend-rev-3 (plus the attending 
style-fixups).  It encompasses those earlier patches.

The real problem is that our current email workflow patterns don't 
provide a standardized way for maintainers to tell when a new patch 
submission is meant to override or replace an earlier submission (or 
even a set of earlier submissions).  Does anybody have some suggestions 
for a good way to do this?

Alan Stern


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/