From: "Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>
To: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
Cc: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>,
lpieralisi@kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, jingoohan1@gmail.com,
manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, robh@kernel.org,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 0/3] Standardize link status check to return bool
Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 23:57:28 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250513145728.GA3513600@rocinante> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aCNLl-Kq0DPwm2Iq@ryzen>
Hello,
> > > Changes for RESEND:
> > > - add Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> >
> > Resending a patch is not a place to add new tags.
>
> While I realize that:
> https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#don-t-get-discouraged-or-impatient
>
> states:
> """
> "RESEND" only applies to resubmission of a patch or patch series which
> have not been modified in any way from the previous submission.
> """
Yes, I would often take verbiage of this document verbatim, but..
> I would assume that this only refers to the commit log and code,
> and that picking up tags has to be an acceptable exception.
The above comment prompted me to inquire with a more senior maintainers,
purely as I was curious what the opinions/preferences would be. And, as
such, the replies I've got were:
- No, follow the documentation
- I don't care, really
- It's OK, make sure to pick the tag, if it makes sense
So, wide spectrum of answers. As such, I take it as, "it's up to the
maintainer", for lack of less ambiguous answers.
> If I take myself as an example, I would not be happy if I spent time
> reviewing a large patch series, but because the maintainers somehow
> missed that series, so the patch author has to RESEND it (without
> picking up tags), my Reviewed-by tags get lost.
While it's not about making you happy, I agree, that trying to preserve the
tag might be the correct approach here. As such, I will adopt this approach,
whereas with other it might vary.
Thank you!
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-13 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-10 16:07 [RESEND PATCH v2 0/3] Standardize link status check to return bool Hans Zhang
2025-05-10 16:07 ` [RESEND PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: dwc: " Hans Zhang
2025-05-13 8:00 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-10 16:07 ` [RESEND PATCH v2 2/3] PCI: mobiveil: Refactor link status check Hans Zhang
2025-05-13 8:00 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-10 16:07 ` [RESEND PATCH v2 3/3] PCI: cadence: Simplify j721e " Hans Zhang
2025-05-13 8:01 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-13 9:33 ` [RESEND PATCH v2 0/3] Standardize link status check to return bool Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-05-16 8:52 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-16 14:57 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-05-13 9:40 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-05-13 14:42 ` Hans Zhang
2025-05-13 10:21 ` Krzysztof Wilczyński
2025-05-13 13:39 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-13 14:57 ` Krzysztof Wilczyński [this message]
2025-05-13 14:47 ` Hans Zhang
2025-05-13 15:04 ` Krzysztof Wilczyński
2025-05-13 15:09 ` Hans Zhang
2025-05-13 15:41 ` Niklas Cassel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250513145728.GA3513600@rocinante \
--to=kw@linux.com \
--cc=18255117159@163.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cassel@kernel.org \
--cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox