On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 01:04:32AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > You got some feedback at v11 (I believe) from Jakub about reposting too > soon. The phrasing was relatively rude and I'm not sure that you got the > central idea right. Large patch sets are generally less welcome when > submitted back to back compared to small ones, but they still need to be > posted frequent enough to not lose reviewers' attention. And small > fixups to fix a build as module are not going to make a huge difference > when reviewing, so it's best not to dig your own grave by gratuitously > bumping the version number just for a compilation fix. Again, replying > to your own patch saying "X was supposed to be Y, otherwise please go on > reviewing", may help. I hope I'm not coming off as a know-it-all by saying this, and I didn't intend to make you feel bad. Ask me how do I know, and the answer will be by making the same mistakes, of course. Not sure if he's already on your radar, but you can watch and analyze the patches submitted by Russell King. For example the recent patch set for making phylink accept DSA CPU port OF nodes with no fixed-link or phy-handle. Perfect timing in resubmitting a new series when one was due, even when the previous one got no feedback whatsoever (which seems to be the hardest situation to deal with). You need to be able to take decisions even when you're doing so on your own, and much of that comes with experience.
