public inbox for kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Existing patches of similar content
@ 2025-09-07 18:57 Torin Carey
  2025-09-08 21:48 ` Alison Schofield
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Torin Carey @ 2025-09-07 18:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kernel Newbies

Hi KernelNewbies,

Apologies if this is a stupid question.

I was finishing up on a patch to add a new (fairly small) feature to an existing driver.  While looking at the archives for the relevant mailing list, I noticed another contributor had submitted a patch to add the exact same feature just under a year ago, but the thread seems to have gone stale.  I believe there are some bits that were missing from this patch in terms of correctness.

What's the usual etiquette to approach this situation? I could:
1. submit my patch for review anyway; or
2. resurrect this thread providing a review for it along with the additions I think might be necessary; or
3. a combination of both?

---
Torin

_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Existing patches of similar content
  2025-09-07 18:57 Existing patches of similar content Torin Carey
@ 2025-09-08 21:48 ` Alison Schofield
  2025-09-15 12:41   ` Torin Carey
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alison Schofield @ 2025-09-08 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Torin Carey; +Cc: Kernel Newbies

On Sun, Sep 07, 2025 at 06:57:02PM +0000, Torin Carey wrote:
> Hi KernelNewbies,
> 
> Apologies if this is a stupid question.
> 
> I was finishing up on a patch to add a new (fairly small) feature to an existing driver.  While looking at the archives for the relevant mailing list, I noticed another contributor had submitted a patch to add the exact same feature just under a year ago, but the thread seems to have gone stale.  I believe there are some bits that were missing from this patch in terms of correctness.
> 
> What's the usual etiquette to approach this situation? I could:
> 1. submit my patch for review anyway; or
> 2. resurrect this thread providing a review for it along with the additions I think might be necessary; or
> 3. a combination of both?

Kudo's to you for asking and for looking through the lore history of your
subsystem and finding the history of this feature.

There's a lot of variability in lore mailing lists, reviewers, and maintainers
responsiveness, so to be generic, I'll suggest your #2 option. Reply to the
patch, show what you'd like to change, and see what happens.

Maybe you breathe new life into it, the original author picks up your changes,
and the feature moves forward.

Maybe the original author acknowledges your changes and asks you to pick it up
and carry it forward.

Maybe crickets, in which case you can submit a new patch, probably with a tag
'Originally-by:' or 'Co-developed-by'.

BTW if you do pick it up, make sure to address any concerns raised with the
original patch.

Good Luck,
Alison

> 
> ---
> Torin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
> https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Existing patches of similar content
  2025-09-08 21:48 ` Alison Schofield
@ 2025-09-15 12:41   ` Torin Carey
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Torin Carey @ 2025-09-15 12:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alison Schofield; +Cc: Kernel Newbies

On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 02:48:27PM -0700, Alison Schofield wrote:
> Kudo's to you for asking and for looking through the lore history of your
> subsystem and finding the history of this feature.
> 
> There's a lot of variability in lore mailing lists, reviewers, and maintainers
> responsiveness, so to be generic, I'll suggest your #2 option. Reply to the
> patch, show what you'd like to change, and see what happens.
> 
> Maybe you breathe new life into it, the original author picks up your changes,
> and the feature moves forward.
> 
> Maybe the original author acknowledges your changes and asks you to pick it up
> and carry it forward.
> 
> Maybe crickets, in which case you can submit a new patch, probably with a tag
> 'Originally-by:' or 'Co-developed-by'.
> 
> BTW if you do pick it up, make sure to address any concerns raised with the
> original patch.
> 
> Good Luck,
> Alison

Hi Alison,

Thanks for the advice!  In that case I'll work on putting some review comments
together and see if it goes anywhere.  If not I'll consider publishing my own
patch.

The original patch didn't seem to receive any concerns, but hopefully some
renewal to it could get some more attention on it.

Thanks,
Torin


_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2025-09-15 12:43 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-09-07 18:57 Existing patches of similar content Torin Carey
2025-09-08 21:48 ` Alison Schofield
2025-09-15 12:41   ` Torin Carey

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox