From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752061AbbALRgW (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2015 12:36:22 -0500 Received: from mx02.posteo.de ([89.146.194.165]:59048 "EHLO mx02.posteo.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751000AbbALRgV (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2015 12:36:21 -0500 Message-ID: <54B4060C.4010004@posteo.de> Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 18:36:12 +0100 From: Martin Kepplinger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Guenter Roeck CC: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] hwmon: jc42: use bitops' sign_extend16 References: <1418660317-21750-1-git-send-email-martink@posteo.de> <1418660317-21750-4-git-send-email-martink@posteo.de> <20141215212948.GA23765@roeck-us.net> <548FDC85.3060400@posteo.de> <54B251A7.3000403@posteo.de> <54B2AA69.80305@roeck-us.net> In-Reply-To: <54B2AA69.80305@roeck-us.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 2015-01-11 um 17:52 schrieb Guenter Roeck: > On 01/11/2015 02:34 AM, Martin Kepplinger wrote: >> Am 2014-12-16 um 08:17 schrieb Martin Kepplinger: >>> Am 2014-12-15 um 22:29 schrieb Guenter Roeck: >>>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 05:18:34PM +0100, Martin Kepplinger wrote: >>>>> --- >>>> >>>> Some description would be nice. Also, please consider adding >>>> relevant subsystem mailing lists and maintainers to your patches. >>>> >>> >>> I shouldn't have added the Signed-off-by line to some of them. Sorry. >>> >>> The driver-patches are meant to be examples of what can be changed if >>> the sign_extend functions are added. I don't know if they are taken and >>> planned to post the driver patches (probably more) thereafter, and of >>> course to the relevant people. >> >> Is this sign_extendXX() set of functions considered to be added to >> bitops.h ? >> >> Just checking if I can prepare some driver-patches (the ones I posted >> are just examples, meant to be re-sent to relevant maintainers when it's >> time), or not. >> > > You should probably ask the question as response to patch 1/6. > > In general, it might be useful to send example patches like this one as > RFC. > Sending it as real patch and then saying "it is just an example" may result > in the entire series being ignored. This is not a matter of Signed-off > or not > (originally I didn't even understand what you wanted to say with your > reply), > but a matter of a non-misleading headline. > > Thanks, > Guenter > Thanks for the advice. I resent, https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/1/12/590 because the thing is easier than it might now seem, and hope that doesn't add confusion. thanks again, martin