From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752775Ab2DXKqN (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2012 06:46:13 -0400 Received: from s15943758.onlinehome-server.info ([217.160.130.188]:43034 "EHLO mail.x86-64.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751854Ab2DXKqL (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2012 06:46:11 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:46:06 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Cc: Linux Edac Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Doug Thompson Subject: Re: [PATCH] edac.h: Add generic layers for describing a memory location Message-ID: <20120424104606.GB11559@aftab.osrc.amd.com> References: <4F95A5CE.7010804@redhat.com> <1335208746-15223-1-git-send-email-mchehab@redhat.com> <4F95B671.2070003@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F95B671.2070003@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 08:07:13PM +0000, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > There are 55 patches affected by this change. Applying them locally > was as simple as running this small script to the submitted patches: > > $ for i in `quilt series`; do sed s,is_csrow,is_virt_csrow,g $i|sed s,GET_POS,EDAC_DIMM_PTR,g| >a && mv a $i; done > > However, mailbombing 55 patches just because of the above rename > is probably not very welcome by the people at the ML. Also, at least > for me, it seems more logical to add a patch like that at the end of > the patch series, than to force people to re-analyze the entire patchset. > > Due to that, I won't resend the entire patchbomb to the ML. This is exactly one of the reasons why one shouldn't send mailbombs like that in the first place. Documentation/SubmittingPatches does not state this for no reason: "If you cannot condense your patch set into a smaller set of patches, then only post say 15 or so at a time and wait for review and integration." And having patches which change earlier patches in your patchset is absolutely a no-no. This means at least that your previous patches haven't been reviewed properly and still suffer some churn, causing the later ones to need readjustment. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach GM: Alberto Bozzo Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551