From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S967233AbeBNKml (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 05:42:41 -0500 Received: from heliosphere.sirena.org.uk ([172.104.155.198]:38264 "EHLO heliosphere.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S967089AbeBNKmk (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 05:42:40 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:42:35 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Harald Geyer Cc: Liam Girdwood , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH,RESEND2] regulator: fixed, gpio: dt: regulator-name is required property Message-ID: <20180214104235.GA9804@sirena.org.uk> References: <1518532988-10990-1-git-send-email-harald@ccbib.org> <20180213154530.GF5988@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Support wildlife -- vote for an orgy. User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:00:12AM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote: > Mark Brown writes: > > No, a content free ping is when you just send a reply saying something > > to the effect of "hey, what's going on with this?". > Well, I did quote the entire patch and gave a summary of the status > as far as I know it. So I really don't understand why I got the > "no content free pings" response ... Which just boils down to a "what's going on with this" message. > > As I said in my > > reply best case the answer is going to be "I have no idea, you need to > > resend since I'll need the patch to do anything with it" and worst case > > it just won't get seen at all if the thing really did get buried > > somehow. > So you are saying you don't want pings as followups to patches at all, if > the patch is old enough that it probably got lost? > I guess that would make sense too, but again it's not obvious to read > the canned response that way. No, I'm saying don't send pings at all. Resend patches if you think they've got lost, and as normal when you're sending a patch it should start off a new thread. The goal is to send something that can be directly acted on when it's seen rather than requring another round of mails. --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAlqEEpsACgkQJNaLcl1U h9DVTQf/bMdvugDYsrcHN5R15sh6pn8pr9OFoNDDXPdLxr7X6VjnuWP8Nw++rKaf 2AxzSYU/kRA1hR2aUSusNqqaYuWtCVkGoM2cfIFnF0w3akOrbL8S4XP4sCO2LJQX BsqlrpjQAiD3UA6XjSN8H229xjHANdh3xgZoiR7UVTBHwiTOCOC1untkiPFt+zxm wRM6OTt9Y3+cIWH0mp9s+44nDimnoqRrKuL7KAvaeMTmynODgZkAAdDYgZWWZ+jk JrfngHPfeeZmrWYeJN5KYINOAH/ZlSNV1hDT9jC8Rq9+oZdC+WzhXnA0QYljtRdq MBFSVmTO/J3mrHFI4ZSeyykYMsLnJQ== =Uflm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tThc/1wpZn/ma/RB--