Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc:     Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@gmail.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        saurav.girepunje@hotmail.com, Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net,
        phil@philpotter.co.uk, straube.linux@gmail.com,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: core: remove the function power_saving_wk_hdl
Date:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:31:28 +0200
Message-ID: <2311011.CixZWWR6MO@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20210920113221.GP2088@kadam>
References: <YTub30ZRG3oLbxQW@user> <1651026.4NJzAxWbHA@localhost.localdomain> <20210920113221.GP2088@kadam>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

On Monday, September 20, 2021 1:32:21 PM CEST Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 01:13:54PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > On Monday, September 20, 2021 12:36:06 PM CEST Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 10:52:50PM +0530, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On 13/09/21 9:48 pm, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 11:24:39PM +0530, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
> > > > > > Remove the function power_saving_wk_hdl() as it just calling
> > > > > > the rtw_ps_processor().Instead of power_saving_wk_hdl() call 
directly
> > > > > > rtw_ps_processor().
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > []
> > > > > 
> > > > > Also does not apply to my tree.  Please rebase against my staging-
next
> > > > > branch and resend.
> > > > > 
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > 
> > > > > greg k-h
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Greg,
> > > > 
> > > > I always do rebase against your staging-testing branch. Can you help 
me 
> > to
> > > > understand.When we need to rebase on staging-next. Do we always need 
to
> > > > rebase against staging-next..!
> > > 
> > > Yes, you should.  When you are working on code that lots of other 
people
> > > are working on, there will be conflicts like this, and you just need to
> > > stay on top of it.
> > > 
> > > thanks,
> > > 
> > > greg k-h
> > > 
> > 
> > Sorry, Greg. I'm confused... :(
> > 
> > As far as I know, everyone here make patches for staging-testing.
> 
> Nope.  It's only you.

And Saurav (at least) :)

I've been misled and in turn I misled Pavel. This is due to a guide in 
kernelnewbies.org that explicitly says to use staging-testing:

https://kernelnewbies.org/OutreachyfirstpatchSetup

In that page the is a section ("Set up your Linux kernel code repository") 
which says: "[] Then use the revision control system called git to clone Greg 
Kroah-Hartman's staging tree repository: git clone -b staging-testing git://
git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git".

I assumed that those instructions must be followed also by developers that 
are not (anymore) in the Outreachy program.

Obviously, I was wrong in assuming the above.

Thanks for your reply, Dan.

Regards,

Fabio

> 
> The staging-testing branch can be rebased so maybe you will write a
> patch against something that never makes it to staging-next and everyone
> will be puzzled.
> 
> That's unlikely to happen and we won't be puzzled for long because we
> try not to invest too much time wondering why patches don't apply.
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>