On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 02:40:42PM -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 15:12:57 +0200 > > > Hi Dave, > > > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 11:06:17AM -0400, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@xxxxxxxx> > >> Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 00:33:45 +0800 > >> > >> > I should've mentioned that patches 3 ~ 10, and only these, should go > >> > through net-next. sunxi will handle the remaining clk, device tree, and > >> > soc driver patches. > >> > >> Ok, I just noticed this. > >> > >> Why don't you just post those patches separately as a series on their > >> own then, in order to avoid confusion? > >> > >> Then you can adjust the patch series header posting to explain the > >> non-net-next changes, where they got merged, and what they provide > >> in order to faciliate the net-next changes. > > > > I now that we usually have some feedback from non-net maintainers that > > they actually prefer seeing the full picture (and I also tend to > > prefer that as well) and having all the patches relevant to enable a > > particular feature, even if it means getting multiple maintainers > > involved. > > > > Just to make sure we understood you fully, do you want Chen-Yu to > > resend his serie following your comments, or was that just a general > > remark for next time? > > Yeah, good questions. > > I think it can be argued either way. For review having the complete > context is important. > > But from a maintainer's standpoint, when there is any ambiguity > whatsoever about what patches go into this tree or that, it is really > frowned upon and is quite error prone. > > Also, that header posting is _SO_ important. It explains the series. > But for these 'partial apply' situations the header posting refers > to patches not in the series. > > This looks terrible in the logs, when, as I do, the header posting > text is added to a marge commit for the series. People will read it > and say "where are all of these other changes mentioned in the text? > was this series misapplied?" > > That's why, maybe after the review is successful, I want the actual > patch series standalone with appropriately updated header posting > text. Ok, thanks for the explanation, that makes sense :) Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
