Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> This is v7, but as I understand your numbering, it goes with v5 of patch >> 1/2 that I just reviewed (usually we just increment the version number >> on the whole series and treat it as a unit, even if some patches didn't >> change from version to version). > > The reason those patches are having their own numbers is that they are > orthogonal to each other and can be applied / rejected independently. In such a case, we wouldn't label them 1/2 and 2/2, which tells the readers that these are two pieces that are to be applied together to form a single unit of change. That was what these numbered patches with different version numbers confusing. > But ok, since now we have them considered both together, their next > versions posted will be uniform v8. OK. Thanks for clarifying.