Patch lost?

[Wolfram Sang]

Doug,

thanks for looking into the issue!

> Oh, OK.  Here's a really good guess.  The patch isn't present in the
> LKML project on patchwork.kernel.org either.  Lists that the patch
> were sent to:

Yeah, that looks plausible that the vger-lists are missing.

> 
> * linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org - Not present (should be on patchwork.kernel.org)
> * linux-i2c at vger.kernel.org - Not present (should be on patchwork.ozlabs.org)
> * linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org - Patchwork sees (patchwork.kernel.org)
> * uclinux-dist-devel at blackfin.uclinux.org - I see replies on
> "http://www.mail-archive.com" but not the original

This list is moderated for non-subscribers, probably that's why.

> * linux-omap at vger.kernel.org - Not present (should be on patchwork.kernel.org)
> * davinci-linux-open-source at linux.davincidsp.com - Patchwork sees
> (patchwork.kernel.org)
> * linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org - Patchwork sees (patchwork.ozlabs.org)
> 
> 
> No lists serviced by vger.kernel.org got the patch.  My best guess is
> that the patch had too many recipients and so looked like spam.

OK, so I probably got the mail because I was on CC (and not via the
i2c-list). Interestingly, gmane has the patch in the i2c-archive:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1442376/focus=56428

Yet, spinics and marc.info do not have it. So, it seems gmane has some
extra logic?

> Perhaps I should have trimmed down the list?

I'd wonder. vger should be used to large CC lists.

> Not in the habit of sending patches that touch so many files and
> usually I let "get_maintainer" decide who I should email (and use
> "patman" to call get_maintainer).

Ah, didn't know about 'patman', might have a look later. get_maintainer
is nice, yet I usually use it with --no-git to only CC the maintainers,
not the contributors for such kind of cleanups.

> In any case, thank you for applying.  :)

Thanks for doing the cleanup :)

Regards,

   Wolfram