From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (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 2A9EF13667F for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:50:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712677848; cv=none; b=KLocbi0Zq+BQxu00y+kqWvUjzlY6tn4NFaTbqLv6owsgtXlkSO3TjNOFthCan5IEwJEwx6kphfEcWmXufFE6PoikKN0rXHS7eVXsP20AMwmXt3VYYNNN4oIEnk9Ned3fWe+EVLMHGwCCchuB/xSAESZgkOVhLjubUefECntylNs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712677848; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pygK1J5JV3O7/AW5QM1tOvRqfQbLIGluOhqx4bED/Ko=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jO7nkM+4Y/cGN25kjymds1L0KMEKYjUObwjfOYj+LxkWDX2O/+eJsnuFYjxlBvC62oIZkBhL95gV9EmugcGlMTbfnLwTAkBSIA9pWsbKinP+OmiFEhVXxjmbWW+qEl0JiozWuGqizgXdGC9AuzKE/Yi3wcZItApSnTgBZdY6SIA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=FIHutssz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="FIHutssz" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1712677846; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=LJ7o/g5OvU2I76hdL75eoRuL3bpxGrQAZ0TmKPfvh+4=; b=FIHutssz/DxP43bvS8wvdsBatzASyk+0Q7DDzRpcTi1bndWAC2VJrZ4ipXixUNdPMaU3qy m9MckgnWsTES5bdBde9gDJoqw7MPZJ+yOMo2ALUZU/N7Fr6SeLkd4tMpVOKqPsOC7HGvM8 6vHXJviPDb48sbi87GzaIyIi6UgWfBg= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-390-PTtMy_yzPlaYzZidik78PQ-1; Tue, 09 Apr 2024 11:50:42 -0400 X-MC-Unique: PTtMy_yzPlaYzZidik78PQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.9]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 299C980171E; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:50:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.192.92]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 559D9492BC7; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:50:40 +0000 (UTC) From: Jose Ignacio Tornos Martinez To: lucas.demarchi@intel.com Cc: emil.l.velikov@gmail.com, gustavo.sousa@intel.com, jtornosm@redhat.com, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, md@linux.it Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 patch] libkmod: add weak dependecies Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 17:50:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20240409155035.524993-1-jtornosm@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-modules@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.9 Hello Lucas, > Sorry for the delay. I will review this later this week. No problem! > For now, I'm a bit confused. Why do we have 2 patches? > > [PATCH v2 kmod] libkmod: add weak dependecies > [PATCH v2 patch] libkmod: add weak dependecies > > Was one of them sent by mistake? Yes, one is a mistake but only in the suffix in [PATH v2 ...] that should be kmod. Indeed the content of the patches is the same for both. You can choose [PATCH v2 kmod] because as I said the suffix is ok. Sorry for the confusion, I should have commented ... > No need to resend now, but it'd be preferred to skip --in-reply-to= > and just rely on -v2 and let b4 do its thing to detect new versions. Sorry again, I didn't know it, next time I will do as you say. Thanks Best regards José Ignacio