From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36411) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhgXf-0004Hv-QB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:17:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhgXb-0004NC-PO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:17:11 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44175) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhgXb-0004N1-7s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:17:07 -0400 References: <1443701677-13629-1-git-send-email-markmb@redhat.com> <560D5945.5050700@redhat.com> From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: <560D5C7E.8080900@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:17:02 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <560D5945.5050700@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEMU fw_cfg DMA interface List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake , =?UTF-8?Q?Marc_Mar=c3=ad?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, seabios@seabios.org Cc: Mark Rutland , Rob Herring , Drew , Arnd Bergmann , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Alexander Graf , Kevin O'Connor , Gerd Hoffmann On 10/01/15 18:03, Eric Blake wrote: > [meta-comment] >=20 > On 10/01/2015 06:14 AM, Marc Mar=C3=AD wrote: >> Implementation of the FW CFG DMA interface. >=20 > The subject line is missing "v4" and "0/7". Also, the cover letter is > missing a diffstat. That makes it harder to see from the cover letter > what the rest of the series is about. 'git format-patch/send-email > --cover-letter' does what you want; you can even 'git config > format.coverletter=3Dauto' to always include a decent cover letter on a= ny > multi-patch series. >=20 This posting follows a little bit different pattern, one that I myself follow when posting patches for two (or more) components that must work in sync. Usually, a top-level blurb is manually cross-posted to all relevant mailing lists. Then, each separate patch series is posted only to the relevant mailing list, with its own cover letter (as usual with git), *in response* to the manually posted blurb. This has the following benefits: - in mailing list archives that organize messages into threads *across* mailing lists (like Gmane does, for example), the top-level manual blurb is a good "root" for referencing the entire posting. - The same is true for personal mailboxes, if a recipient is explicitly CC'd on all of the messages. Because the top level blurb is parent to several patch series, and those child series can all have different version numbers (due to different numbers of respinds), it is not always straightforward to assign a version number to the top blurb. Thanks Laszlo