At 2022-11-07 20:07:52, "Greg KH" <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 06:26:16PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: >Why all the blank lines? 163 mail automatically add it , and I forget remove it. > >> At 2022-11-07 17:53:57, "Greg KH" <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 05:30:56PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote: >> >As I said, this is just a define, not a macro at all. >> > >> >> And could you give your comments in previous patch, not the 'final' one? >> > >> >I do not understand, what previous patrch? What "final" one? What is >> >the "latest" patch? >> previous patch: >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221027115123.5326-1-slark_xiao@xxxxxxx/ >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221028023711.4196-1-slark_xiao@xxxxxxx/ >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221102024437.15248-1-slark_xiao@xxxxxxx/ >> >> 'final' patch: >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221107084826.8888-1-slark_xiao@xxxxxxx/ >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221101015858.6777-1-slark_xiao@xxxxxxx/ > >That's 2 different versions, with a total of 3. > >> >> The 'final' patch was committed according to the advice of the feature >> maintainer. >> > >> >> In another pci_ids patch, you break it in v3 and break it here again in v2. >> > >> >I broke what? >> You could have voiced out such comment in V1, V2 before the 'final'. > >We all review patches when we can. There is no rule that people can not >comment on newer patches, or older ones. > >In fact, it would be wonderful if you could take some time and review >patches from others. It would help your understanding of the code and >how the kernel development process works. > >thanks, > >greg k-h Agree with this. But you know, 5 attempt just for a little update were rejected It's so frustrating. Anyway, I re-submit another v3 patch for this change. Please give your comment if you are free. Thanks
