From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B63C08633F; Sun, 27 Jul 2025 17:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753636809; cv=none; b=Gjxgsja0ZWdJQQolud2ZTnYW4NsNcbQ5PHry9Rt2unYSiGp0RfIy6iP3TLlbIwT7NJDxUXJ/Jg7Cj4SWId6GPWjFiK76ADjiE/YkrVoafkwaaXqG3FZ52rySrhX9Gqb+M5wfFy/EykbFtHCB4yoDf8IpP+LVui0wZgsRaxEmT7Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1753636809; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8meqovJT8X8IsHJZ0ka65U80kD2cfJ3BG1KmS6GR52Q=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Cc:Subject:From:To: References:In-Reply-To; b=DM/hFSQZLm09wLyd/OtvKcyby+F/pots+gvN6ocYv0GEzASQU3qufOOs2SlIIjqQuriNCutfFy8YcvI40Azo5QkB82CINzVW1Lkp+dY43XayS6CbQz730kejHesexBPJXQvqEE69qPl+vJnTH43ir3btPiJzyXGGtsuJ3b3WD/4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=QVNgKwgV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QVNgKwgV" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69022C4CEEB; Sun, 27 Jul 2025 17:20:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1753636809; bh=8meqovJT8X8IsHJZ0ka65U80kD2cfJ3BG1KmS6GR52Q=; h=Date:Cc:Subject:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=QVNgKwgVRUvkUD9CIxsUe03vVCjwI/p8yyiMkKTPZHtcbGwyjUlrKwI820y0w33s8 3Dt7pziFRvGM1WHwyUZEJTvKr6MHNil9ukzYFhcCWwKuI7jBNwNHoWicX5O4Gj+wbp GpWDg32KEx7leMhF3hIqdrjwTkqwD/DZEVGAzv0gj565r2J3yJdpfzHGrlbJ0VWz3Y ZPMw1cahkJjQavEswjLBBx1vLFr7v9P4wqNoSDG+f8yH52S1GeGPpo7XDpRp50LV6u O6sOMzKwUhWbalBXsnPYklcKHewz8g445bgLdw/xxwGRA70nX2xzRsnTI+0oeNNzxH k3R8jrh8a052A== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 19:20:02 +0200 Message-Id: Cc: "Shankari Anand" , , , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , "Dave Ertman" , "Ira Weiny" , "Leon Romanovsky" , "Miguel Ojeda" , "Alex Gaynor" , "Boqun Feng" , "Gary Guo" , =?utf-8?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Roy_Baron?= , "Andreas Hindborg" , "Alice Ryhl" , "Trevor Gross" , "Danilo Krummrich" , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , "Abdiel Janulgue" , "Daniel Almeida" , "Robin Murphy" , "Viresh Kumar" , "Nishanth Menon" , "Stephen Boyd" , "Bjorn Helgaas" , =?utf-8?q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=C5=84ski?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] rust: kernel: update ARef and AlwaysRefCounted imports from sync::aref From: "Benno Lossin" To: "Miguel Ojeda" X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.1 References: <20250717073450.15090-1-shankari.ak0208@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On Sun Jul 27, 2025 at 4:26 PM CEST, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > On Sun, Jul 27, 2025 at 2:37=E2=80=AFPM Benno Lossin = wrote: >> >> That's good advice. I want to add that in this case, I think a series is >> better sending 7 independent patches. Using a series allows people to >> see if it is complete (ie there might be places that are missed). It >> also allows someone to send a single mail reviewing all patches & giving >> general comments about all patches in the series. > > It is fine if places are missed, since in this case they are not meant > to be applied at once -- maintainers may think they are supposed to > give Acked-bys instead of applying them, and here the idea was to try > to see if we could get a migration like this via different trees > slowly, rather than the way we did the others. AFAIK maintainers can pick different parts of a series', right? > For the "final series" that removes the re-export, it should > definitely be a series, because in such a case the idea is to apply > them all and remove the re-export at the end of it. > > I guess it depends a bit on what maintainers want to do and the case > (e.g. if it is a tricky change, it may be best to have a series). > Sometimes same people may do it differently, e.g. [1][2]. > > But I agree that many independent patches are painful too, including > in Lore; and that it is always nice to have an "index" of all the > patches for those that want to see it as you say -- perhaps providing > a link to a Lore search, or having them all in the same thread can > help (though that can be confusing on its own), or having a first RFC > version as a series that can be linked later before splitting. This is the main benefit in this case I'd say. --- Cheers, Benno > > Cheers, > Miguel > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241127091036.444330-2-u.kleine-koenig@b= aylibre.com/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221118224540.619276-1-uwe@kleine-koeni= g.org/