From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 525E4C77B6C for ; Mon, 3 Apr 2023 17:13:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 3/3] ALSA: control: use counting semaphore as write lock for ELEM_WRITE operation To: cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org From: "Alexander Grund" X-Originating-Location: Dresden, Saxony, DE (79.254.25.230) X-Originating-Platform: Linux Firefox 111 User-Agent: GROUPS.IO Web Poster MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2023 10:13:06 -0700 References: <913352448.1492969.1680512218678@webmail.strato.com> In-Reply-To: <913352448.1492969.1680512218678@webmail.strato.com> Message-ID: <6415.1680541986353766715@lists.cip-project.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="I1ENuNLUWcoqS1lXGrt0" List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Mon, 03 Apr 2023 17:13:16 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.cip-project.org/g/cip-dev/message/11159 --I1ENuNLUWcoqS1lXGrt0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >=20 > Please add backports commit id. I would have added this below the first line (after an empty line): >=20 > commit 5bbb1ab5bd0b01c4f0b19ae03fdfec487f839517 upstream. Would that have been correct? Or would something else have been required in= addition? >=20 >=20 >=20 > Normally, even for small changes, you would re-format the whole series > with "git format-patch --cover-letter --subject-prefix 'PATCH v2'" and > send it all again with git send-mail, adding a note to the cover letter o= n > what has changed in this revision. >=20 >=20 So it isn't a problem that this opens a new (series of) threads instead of = replying to the mails requesting the changes, is it? I use `git send-email` directly (I have set sendemail.annotate=3Dtrue & sen= demail.confirm=3Dalways), so my command would have looked like this: `git s= end-email --cover-letter --subject-prefix=3D"PATCH v2" --suppress-cc=3Dall= =C2=A0 --to=3Dcip-dev@lists.cip-project.org cip/linux-4.4.y-st..fix-alsa` w= hich is basically how I created the current 4 mails. I'm wondering if this is correct, especially as I used the prefix "PATCH 4.= 4" before to denote that it is meant for the 4.4.y branch. This doesn't see= m to be required, so what should I use as the prefix instead for a (future)= patch/patch series? Anyway I noticed you already applied the commits fixing the mentioned issue= s before tagging, thanks! I'd still appreciate a reply or a link to a page answering those question i= f one already exists, so the process can be smoother next time. Thanks a lot! --I1ENuNLUWcoqS1lXGrt0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Please add backports commit id.
I would have added this below the first line (after an empty line):
commit 5bbb1ab5bd0b01c4f0b19ae03fdfec487f839517 upstream.

Would that have been correct? Or would something else have been required= in addition?


Normally, even for small changes, you would re-format the whole series w= ith "git format-patch --cover-letter --subject-prefix 'PATCH v2'" and send = it all again with git send-mail, adding a note to the cover letter on what = has changed in this revision.

So it isn't a problem that this opens a new (series of) threads instead = of replying to the mails requesting the changes, is it?

I use `git send-email` directly (I have set sendemail.annotate=3Dtrue &a= mp; sendemail.confirm=3Dalways), so my command would have looked like this:= `git send-email --cover-letter --subject-prefix=3D"PATCH v2" --suppress-cc= =3Dall  --to=3Dcip-dev@lists.cip-project.org cip/linux-4.4.y-st..fix-a= lsa` which is basically how I created the current 4 mails.

I'm wondering if this is correct, especially as I used the prefix "PATCH= 4.4" before to denote that it is meant for the 4.4.y branch. This doesn't = seem to be required, so what should I use as the prefix instead for a (futu= re) patch/patch series?

Anyway I noticed you already applied the= commits fixing the mentioned issues before tagging, thanks!

I'd still appreciate a reply or a link to a page answering those questio= n if one already exists, so the process can be smoother next time.
Tha= nks a lot!

--I1ENuNLUWcoqS1lXGrt0--