On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 01:17:58AM +0200, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 02:18:39PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > Jean's point is that you should send an individual patch for each type
> > of individual change. It's ok to say "patch 3 requires you to have
> > applied patches 1 and 2" and so on. Please split this up better.
>
> Here it is...
>
> Use i2c_transfer to send message, so we get proper bus locking.
Oops, you forgot to add a Signed-off-by: line for every patch, as per
Documentation/SubmittingPatches. Care to redo them?
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
