From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laszlo Ersek Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU fw_cfg DMA interface Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:34:56 +0200 Message-ID: <560D60B0.5000902@redhat.com> References: <1443701677-13629-1-git-send-email-markmb@redhat.com> <560D5945.5050700@redhat.com> <560D5C7E.8080900@redhat.com> <560D5DA1.90607@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <560D5DA1.90607@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Blake , =?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Mar=c3=ad?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, seabios@seabios.org Cc: Mark Rutland , Rob Herring , Drew , Arnd Bergmann , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Alexander Graf , Kevin O'Connor , Gerd Hoffmann List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 10/01/15 18:21, Eric Blake wrote: > On 10/01/2015 10:17 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 10/01/15 18:03, Eric Blake wrote: >>> [meta-comment] >>> >>> On 10/01/2015 06:14 AM, Marc Mar=C3=AD wrote: >>>> Implementation of the FW CFG DMA interface. >>> >>> The subject line is missing "v4" and "0/7". Also, the cover letter = is >>> missing a diffstat. That makes it harder to see from the cover let= ter >>> what the rest of the series is about. 'git format-patch/send-email >>> --cover-letter' does what you want; you can even 'git config >>> format.coverletter=3Dauto' to always include a decent cover letter = on any >>> multi-patch series. >>> >> >> This posting follows a little bit different pattern, one that I myse= lf >> follow when posting patches for two (or more) components that must w= ork >> in sync. >=20 > Ok, makes sense. Maybe the only additional suggestions would be to ma= ke > it more obvious in the subject line (put the text 'cross-post' > somewhere?) or have the first paragraph of the meta-cover be more > explicit that there are going to be multiple sub-threads, one per > project, where all subthreads must be applied to their corresponding > project for the overall feature to be complete? That's a good idea. I think prefixing the main blurb's subject with [cross-post], and a "standard" first paragraph based on your above suggestion, would be helpful. > [And maybe I should wait a few minutes for the full thread to appear = in > my inbox, rather than immediately replying to the first mail while th= e > series is still incomplete due to mail delays...] I'm not patient; it would be unfair from me to expect others to be... := ) Laszlo