On Mon, 2024-11-25 at 02:44 +0000, Encarnacion, Cedric justine wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2024 2:39 AM > > To: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx>; > > Encarnacion, Cedric justine <Cedricjustine.Encarnacion@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > > i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxxx>; Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>; > > Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@xxxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring > > <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley > > <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sabau, Radu bogdan <Radu.Sabau@xxxxxxxxxx>; Uwe > > Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Torreno, Alexis Czezar > > <AlexisCzezar.Torreno@xxxxxxxxxx>; Andy Shevchenko > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: (pmbus/adp1050): Add bindings > > for adp1051, adp1055 and ltp8800 > > > > [External] > > > > On 20/11/2024 19:07, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > On 11/20/24 09:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > On 20/11/2024 18:11, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 11:58:25AM +0800, Cedric Encarnacion wrote: > > > > > > add dt-bindings for adp1051, adp1055, and ltp8800 pmbus. > > > > > > ADP1051: 6 PWM for I/O Voltage, I/O Current, Temperature > > > > > > ADP1055: 6 PWM for I/O Voltage, I/O Current, Power, Temperature > > > > > > LTP8800-1A/-2/-4A: 150A/135A/200A DC/DC µModule Regulator > > > > > > > > > > > > Co-developed-by: Alexis Czezar Torreno > > <alexisczezar.torreno@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexis Czezar Torreno <alexisczezar.torreno@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Cedric Encarnacion > > <cedricjustine.encarnacion@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > Why did you drop my ack? > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241106- > > linoleum-kebab- > > decf14f54f76@spud/__;!!A3Ni8CS0y2Y!7Q2KluGdg8cJW_wYUd- > > vh5mP66Ns62VZOkPG4Jf7NY9ULtTfjiwYqrUHbik_tI9X4izI6fAQS_7eVscdEFK_X > > OEm$ > > > > So that's a v2? Or v3? Then should be marked correctly. Please start > > > > using b4. I already asked analog.com for this in few cases. Feel free > > > > not to use b4 if you send correct patches, but this is not the case here. > > > > > > Okay, I will start exploring b4 for future patches. > Next time, reach out to me. I have been pointing everbody to b4 (if asked naturally). > > > > > > In general I agree, but this is a combination of two patch series, as mentioned > > > in the summary. I am not sure how to use versioning in such situations. Is it > > > v2 of one series or v3 of the other ? > > I would say the highest and keep the b4 changeset. This allows to use b4 > > diff easily. Choice done here - v1, no usage of b4 - breaks everything, > > look: > > > > b4 diff '<20241120035826.3920-1-cedricjustine.encarnacion@xxxxxxxxxx>' > > Grabbing thread from > > lore.kernel.org/all/20241120035826.3920-1- > > cedricjustine.encarnacion@xxxxxxxxxx/t.mbox.gz > > --- > > Analyzing 13 messages in the thread > > Could not find lower series to compare against. > > This is v2 of one and v3 of another. For the upcoming versions, should I > proceed to v4 which succeeds the highest or continue to v2 based on this > series? > It seems to me the highest is the preferred... - Nuno Sá
