From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fgw22-7.mail.saunalahti.fi (fgw22-7.mail.saunalahti.fi [62.142.5.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A792E134A8 for ; Sat, 5 Jul 2025 18:19:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.142.5.83 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751739547; cv=none; b=MIEhfUl/ugnxiQ0nhVtMMARFbOxe06WHoNRwVDz0EL2Si0GnYAGnFPtNwp5s2kDeZx+j/rvz7egDmRDZJ7i7enX6zRkTh3+VKZaQ36Nm90RF1rsk+6nS2L2g1QWIzfHMVfGhu5YnR4xX4nn9jnC550CnGG0R2Hvcb0g1fBegtcA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751739547; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7hthfrc7tTdg4jCbIpZXZsXxRkwD5UHIMJ/9LVWFQrU=; h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=iwI2EUsFEiOIsy8lRJhHrZFZIrCqWD401KNwet+SJc9Ikan4tJuRxpCsbpyPl6eUKvd+lC+z1b3uw6yD1266HCmvqO5w54E2C7poRfVGBQv9MtABzwq/h5O7yGCHJ1c8EUUI8YiSN4kM2821GvUxGKwK1onSExlJcE/d3fEPpvE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.142.5.83 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: from localhost (88-113-26-232.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.113.26.232]) by fgw20.mail.saunalahti.fi (Halon) with ESMTP id 82ce853c-59cc-11f0-a04e-005056bd6ce9; Sat, 05 Jul 2025 21:18:57 +0300 (EEST) From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2025 21:18:55 +0300 To: Andrew Ijano Cc: Andy Shevchenko , Andy Shevchenko , jic23@kernel.org, andrew.lopes@alumni.usp.br, gustavobastos@usp.br, dlechner@baylibre.com, nuno.sa@analog.com, andy@kernel.org, jstephan@baylibre.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] iio: accel: sca3000: simplify by using newer infrastructure Message-ID: References: <20250618031638.26477-1-andrew.lopes@alumni.usp.br> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Sat, Jul 05, 2025 at 12:03:37AM -0300, Andrew Ijano kirjoitti: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 12:23 PM Andy Shevchenko > wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 03:20:06PM -0300, Andrew Ijano wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:41 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 09:24:19AM -0300, Andrew Ijano wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:56 AM Andy Shevchenko > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 6:17 AM Andrew Ijano wrote: ... > > > > > > I haven't found any reference to a base commit here. Have you > > > > > > forgotten to use --base when preparing the series? > > > > > > In any case, please clarify what this series is based on. > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for pointing this out! I think I forgot to use --base for > > > > > it. In this case, should I submit a new version of the whole patchset > > > > > with this information or is there a better way to do it? > > > > > > > > For now just reply here what is the base. I asked this question above. > > > > > > Ok! No problem. So the base for this patchset is the commit > > > 3c23416f69f2870bea83697d7ab03c6a8497daa7. > > > > No such commit in the repository. :-( > > You are doing something interesting here [1]. > > > > So, make sure you are based on the iio/testing or so, make sure that the base > > commit is the one that may be found on git.kernel.org. Use that in the next > > version. Due to above this version is ambiguous to even start reviewing it. > > > > [1] I have connected IIO subsystem as a remote, so I have access to many trees > > from kernel.org (but not to all of them). > > Actually, I think I didn't fully understand this part of the > contribution process and that's what was causing confusion. > Basically, the base commit appeared in the previous version of this > patchset but I removed it after it was approved, to prevent it from > being reviewed again. However, I think I could just add the > reviewed-by tag. > > I'll send a next version with other corrections and the missing commit > based on iio/testing. What you just described is a normal process of rebasing your local tree against the (updated) upstream branch (in this case we are taling about iio/testing or iio/togreg whichever suits better). Hence, if the commit was approved, the new base should be provided. Under "approved" means that it made the subsystem tree and pending for the upstream. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko