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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74647C2D0CE for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 08:34:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 479E92465B for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 08:34:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="NB17wEru" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726052AbgAUIei (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:34:38 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com ([209.85.221.68]:33340 "EHLO mail-wr1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726920AbgAUIei (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:34:38 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id b6so2174622wrq.0 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 00:34:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=Z+bgbxbzUTNGQI+/VZp2r0XjEBbl7TwogVArBP2mRJc=; b=NB17wErunaQYRJET2RIyMRKFIfBXOSDYccrxJw+1chbepUN6k51qSO2b0fj2H5VNIJ niK0al1uPosacjl4NC4DNjvnvI2LN2c/jBamqYa6fBRRUvWADYKBeBOrqVBiUldT2Lzy Aca99cLF3NbSi47lFpODWO0QDcjuQOOt9kCL4aitGdEjAz60qIpgadd2CSnB9OL2atsg ILEBT4I0Uf2hjT/yQ8X7UCoAO72E2yD7bUkNVuU13x21vJIsAqIt/bTbBruHft2eo0B+ Ydgpujt/xC+IgE0TTed2n8SJgXGypy5yIPqXbxcGbJIVz+LzEWOWhwyB1nD11h4veP7G pTTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Z+bgbxbzUTNGQI+/VZp2r0XjEBbl7TwogVArBP2mRJc=; b=C8V5X+9nH0UeNpBY8OjzZjvjUegaztfgw5Fye4EK8fb56rr3UYoAKbHu/3f1Uj+Pfo CQPSGm2y9LVQZZ4/zsPIaYhq4T3pe6tiUvAWCEoxak5w43MOGzqLajGje6Asft3wMHcK uUnjsKHsLKUYvXdA2uenyiIolruKyKF1EpUSQnmir01s8THozRSR7JjSIoiSpuGdf9e6 lOZ7BffscNd7VQ7+TRRWDUm9ca0rAgn88ysHznv1hSs7w+H1PDn24irWM6CUpXWjyBtq Z7xqhdQnS0Ihfv+xELwM2/RiqEAhsjUe4UGa1cL1jVwm3WmMo6QECnfVdOArPH0WR/Hu CRJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUZkhziQT4po4TBiN7mi3VLQRPJLXmNMofAbdUpwqTnc1D3s+ok iReiw6I2E0SJBbibERVez9pN6w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwzT7EyPaxBCnLVrqxaASOoY/qsRqiUmyFo7lStSiyLndIZNhQhrSyEYyxpC1+tK+YPTXfBJQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6a88:: with SMTP id s8mr3855403wru.173.1579595676129; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 00:34:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from dell ([2.27.35.227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c5sm2904792wmb.9.2020.01.21.00.34.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 21 Jan 2020 00:34:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 08:34:50 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: "Vaittinen, Matti" Cc: "broonie@kernel.org" , "mazziesaccount@gmail.com" , "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-gpio@ger.kernel.org" , "sboyd@kernel.org" , "linus.walleij@linaro.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 00/11] Support ROHM BD71828 PMIC Message-ID: <20200121083450.GG15507@dell> References: <20200120135446.GD6852@sirena.org.uk> <70ac7b71d5d54d4b90ded032214c473569b9fae1.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <70ac7b71d5d54d4b90ded032214c473569b9fae1.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 20 Jan 2020, Vaittinen, Matti wrote: > On Mon, 2020-01-20 at 13:54 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 03:40:20PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > Patch series introducing support for ROHM BD71828 PMIC > > > > > > ROHM BD71828 is a power management IC containing 7 bucks and 7 > > > LDOs. All > > > regulators can be controlled individually via I2C. Bucks 1,2,6 and > > > 7 can also be assigned to a "regulator group" controlled by run- > > > levels. > > > > This is the *third* version of this you've sent today alone. Please > > stop sending me this series until the MFD has been merged, perhaps > > just > > drop the subsystem patches while you resolve whatever the problems > > are > > that remain with the MFD? I'm pretty much just deleting these > > patches > > without even looking at them at this point, it's a large series, it's > > getting huge numbers of resends and I don't think any version I've > > had a > > chance to look at before it got resent had a change in the one > > regulator > > patch that'd cause me to have to re-review it. To be fair, yours is one of the reviews we're waiting for! See [PATCH 03/11]. > Sorry Mark (and all). I guess this is annoying. Why I do resend whole > series is that during the bd71837 work Lee instructed me to always > resend whole series - not just the changed patches. Which in general is the correct thing to do. Having a large threaded series on the list containing in the form of subsequent versions gets real confusing real quick: | [PATCH v2 01/05] | > [PATCH v3 01/05] | [PATCH v2 02/05] | > [PATCH v3 02/05] | -> [PATCH v4 02/05] | [PATCH v2 03/05] | [PATCH v2 04/05] | > [PATCH v3 04/05] | [PATCH v2 05/05] | > [PATCH v3 05/05] | -> [PATCH v4 05/05] | --> [PATCH v5 05/05] | ---> [PATCH v6 05/05] However, you should wait for a suitable period per submission, to give each maintainer a chance to review the patches they are responsible for. > I sure can learn and drop some of the recipients in the future - and > actually I did for this last resend. Reason why you are in the > recipients is that Lee asked me to get your ack for patch 3/11. Same > goes with Stephen. > > Linus is involved as Lee asked me to get his ack for patch 11. > > But resending this series 3 times today is really my fault. (Well, of > course, I did send this and no one else). I messed up the previous > series. > > I was hoping the revision history in cover letter would be a fast way > to determine if something relevant has changed. Additionally, I did try > to include statement that "no changes" in the beginning of each patches > for most of the versions. (for versions up-to 11 - this was omitted > from v12 and v13 which only did very specific changes). > > But sure, I should try to be more careful so that I don't need to do so > many resends - and I really could drop most of the recipients earlier. > Thanks for pointing it out. If dropping recipients is your tactic of choice (I wouldn't choose to do that myself), just ensure you keep everyone on Cc for the cover-letter ("[PATCH 00/00]") and maybe indicate the fact that they have been dropped and why ("dropped Lee since the MFD patches have been reviewed and are unchanged in this series"). Reason being; if/when a set is applied, the cover-letter is used as the Reply-to for sending out the pull-request to all those concerned. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog