On Fri, Sep 22, 2023, Mingwei Zhang wrote: > So yes, they could be put together and they could be put separately. > But I don't see why they _cannot_ be together or cause confusion. Because they don't need to be put together. Roman's patch kinda sorta overlaps with the prev_counter mess, but Jim's fixes are entirely orthogonal. If one person initially posted such a series with everything together I probably wouldn't care *too* much, but combining patches and/or series that aren't tightly coupled or dependent in some way usually does more harm than good. E.g. if a maintainer has complaints against only one or two patches in series of unrelated patches, then grabbing the "good" patches is unnecessarily difficult. It's not truly hard on the maintainer's end, but little bits of avoidable friction in the process adds up across hundreds and thousands of patches. FWIW, my plan is to apply Roman's patch pretty much as-is, grab v2 from Jim, and post my cleanups as a separate series on top (maybe two series, really haven't thought about it yet). The only reason I have them all in a single branch is because there are code conflicts and I know I will apply the patches from Roman and Jim first, i.e. I didn't want to develop on a base that I knew would become stale. > So, I would like to put them together in the same context with a cover letter > fully describing the details. I certainly won't object to a thorough bug report/analysis, but I'd prefer that Jim's series be posted separately (though I don't care if it's you or Jim that posts it).
