All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
	Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>,
	kernel@pengutronix.de,
	Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: stmmac: Make stmmac_dvr_remove() return void
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 17:36:13 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230213173613.67512a1e@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230213162333.iqjlwa2ladkxfooy@pengutronix.de>

On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 17:23:33 +0100 Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Code in both patches looks OK.  
> 
> Is this an Ack?

FWIW we encourage folks on netdev who reviewed a patch to speak up,
even if they don't feel confident enough to send a persistent tag.

> > Also, multiple patches usually require a cover letter. The code changes are 
> > trivial, so maybe the best solution would be to just to squash those patches 
> > together.  
> 
> My conclusion was a bit different: The code changes are trivial, so they
> don't require a cover letter :-)
> 
> I don't care much about squashing the two patches together. I slightly
> prefer to keep the changes as two changes as the changes are orthogonal
> and one patch per thing is the usual action.

Fair enough, 2 patches are fine w/o a cover letter.

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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
	Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>,
	kernel@pengutronix.de,
	Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: stmmac: Make stmmac_dvr_remove() return void
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 17:36:13 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230213173613.67512a1e@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230213162333.iqjlwa2ladkxfooy@pengutronix.de>

On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 17:23:33 +0100 Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Code in both patches looks OK.  
> 
> Is this an Ack?

FWIW we encourage folks on netdev who reviewed a patch to speak up,
even if they don't feel confident enough to send a persistent tag.

> > Also, multiple patches usually require a cover letter. The code changes are 
> > trivial, so maybe the best solution would be to just to squash those patches 
> > together.  
> 
> My conclusion was a bit different: The code changes are trivial, so they
> don't require a cover letter :-)
> 
> I don't care much about squashing the two patches together. I slightly
> prefer to keep the changes as two changes as the changes are orthogonal
> and one patch per thing is the usual action.

Fair enough, 2 patches are fine w/o a cover letter.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-14  1:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-11 11:24 [PATCH 1/2] net: stmmac: Make stmmac_dvr_remove() return void Uwe Kleine-König
2023-02-11 11:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-02-11 11:24 ` [PATCH 2/2] net: stmmac: dwc-qos: Make struct dwc_eth_dwmac_data::remove " Uwe Kleine-König
2023-02-11 11:24   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-02-13 14:21 ` [PATCH 1/2] net: stmmac: Make stmmac_dvr_remove() " Larysa Zaremba
2023-02-13 14:21   ` Larysa Zaremba
2023-02-13 16:23   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-02-13 16:23     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-02-14  1:36     ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2023-02-14  1:36       ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-02-14  4:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2023-02-14  4:10   ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230213173613.67512a1e@kernel.org \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com \
    --cc=joabreu@synopsys.com \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=larysa.zaremba@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peppe.cavallaro@st.com \
    --cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.