On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 22:07 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin
wrote:

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 08:56:05PM +0000, Chris Packham wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 2019-08-27 at 10:13 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin
wrote:

quoted

Just send the single patch to the patch tracker - having it against
5.3-rc is fine (I don't think anything has changed for a long time
with that file.)

Done 
https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/viewpatch.php?id=8902/1

I'm still not entirely sure what to put for the KernelVersion tag. In
hindsight think I misinterpreted your comment above and set it to 5.3rc
(where you meant a series based on 5.3-rcX should apply cleanly). It
probably should have been next or master because it's way past the
merge window for 5.3.

Think about it as "which kernel version was _this_ patch generated
against" - it's a guide for me to know which kernel version it
should be applied to.  The nearest Linus release (rc or final) is
generally sufficient.

If it doesn't apply to my current base, then I might check out that
version, apply it there, and then merge it in, resolving any
conflicts during the merge.

It started off with a different purpose: when we had the older
development system, such as the 2.x series kernels, we would have
even x being the current stable kernels, and concurrently we'd
also have x+1 as the development series.  When someone sent me a
patch back then, it was important to know which kernel series it
was meant for.

I decided not to get rid of it because it provides useful
information when patches don't apply, and gives more options
than me just discarding the patch with a comment saying it
doesn't apply.

Thanks for the info. So 5.3-rc is not as wrong as I thought it was.

One could even summarize the above as.

  git format-patch --add-header \
      "KernelVersion: $(git describe --abbrev=0 HEAD)"

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel