Re: [PATCH v8 00/14] support "task_isolation" mode for nohz_full

Frederic Weisbecker
2015-10-23T02:33:08Z

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 04:31:44PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 10/21/2015 08:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >Can you *please* start a new thread with each posting?
> >
> >This is absolutely unmanageable.
>
> I've been explicitly threading the multiple patch series on purpose
> due to this text in "git help send-email":
>
> --in-reply-to=<identifier>
> Make the first mail (or all the mails with --no-thread) appear
> as a reply to the given Message-Id, which avoids breaking
> threads to provide a new patch series. The second and subsequent
> emails will be sent as replies according to the
> --[no]-chain-reply-to setting.
>
> So for example when --thread and --no-chain-reply-to are
> specified, the second and subsequent patches will be replies to
> the first one like in the illustration below where [PATCH v2
> 0/3] is in reply to [PATCH 0/2]:
>
> [PATCH 0/2] Here is what I did...
> [PATCH 1/2] Clean up and tests
> [PATCH 2/2] Implementation
> [PATCH v2 0/3] Here is a reroll
> [PATCH v2 1/3] Clean up
> [PATCH v2 2/3] New tests
> [PATCH v2 3/3] Implementation
>
> It sounds like this is exactly the behavior you are objecting
> to. It's all one to me because I am not seeing these emails
> come up in some hugely nested fashion, but just viewing the
> responses that I haven't yet triaged away.

I personally (and I think this is the general LKML behaviour) use in-reply-to
when I post a single patch that is a fix for a bug, or a small enhancement,
discussed on some thread. It works well as it fits the conversation inline.

But for anything that requires significant changes, namely a patchset,
and that includes a new version of such patchset, it's usually better
to create a new thread. Otherwise the thread becomes an infinite mess and it
eventually expands further the mail client columns.

Thanks.