Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760804AbYALDMC (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:12:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756724AbYALDLx (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:11:53 -0500 Received: from netrider.rowland.org ([192.131.102.5]:2957 "HELO netrider.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756503AbYALDLw (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:11:52 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:11:52 -0500 (EST) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@netrider.rowland.org To: Greg KH cc: Andrew Morton , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] PM: Do not destroy/create devices while suspended (rev. 2) In-Reply-To: <20080112005619.GA4665@suse.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1116 Lines: 30 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/