From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from lb1-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.22]:48905 "EHLO lb1-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750859AbbEYLjh (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 May 2015 07:39:37 -0400 Message-ID: <556309F3.6050609@xs4all.nl> Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 13:39:31 +0200 From: Hans Verkuil MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Florian Echtler , hans.verkuil@cisco.com, mchehab@osg.samsung.com, linux-media@vger.kernel.org CC: modin@yuri.at Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] [sur40] minor fixes & performance improvements References: <1432211382-5155-1-git-send-email-floe@butterbrot.org> <55630606.8020104@xs4all.nl> <556309C9.90503@butterbrot.org> In-Reply-To: <556309C9.90503@butterbrot.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/25/2015 01:38 PM, Florian Echtler wrote: > On 25.05.2015 13:22, Hans Verkuil wrote: >> On 05/21/2015 02:29 PM, Florian Echtler wrote: >>> This patch series adds several small fixes, features & performance >>> improvements. Many thanks to Martin Kaltenbrunner for testing the >>> original driver & submitting the patches. >> >> The patches look good, but can you repost with better commit logs (i.e. not >> just a subject line). Maintainers have become picky about that and without logs >> Mauro most likely will not accept it. Actually, I'm not even going to try :-) > > OK, will do that later today. Should I just send it as a new patch > series, or in reply to the first one? What's the "best practice" here? New patch series, just prefixed with '[PATCHv2 x/4]'. Thanks! Hans