On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 2:24 AM Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 04:37:47PM GMT, Kanak Shilledar wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:33 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 25/06/2024 09:02, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > On 25/06/2024 08:59, Kanak Shilledar wrote: > > > >> Convert the NXP I2C controller for LPC2xxx/178x/18xx/43xx > > > >> to newer DT schema. Created DT schema based on the .txt file > > > >> - added maintainer from the MAINTAINERS file. > > > >> - added resets property required by the corresponding DTS files. > > > >> > > > >> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> Signed-off-by: Kanak Shilledar <kanakshilledar@xxxxxxxxx> > > > >> --- > > > >> Changes in v3: > > > > you already sent v3 so this is rather v4. What happened here? Why are > > > > you resending this? > > > > > > Ah, I see the changes - you dropped the incorrect tags. It's fine but it > > > should have been v4. Not sure how b4 or other tools will handle this. > > why should b4 complain? I fetch it from the mail-id. And even if > b4 complains, good old git-am still works :-) > > > I thought there is no need to bump up the version just for changing tags. > > You should increase the version number for every single change, > even trivial changes in the commit log. If you are sending again > the same patch (which means that you are git-sending the same > .patch file without any change), then you should tag it as [PATCH > RESEND]. > > > Shall I resend it as v4 and update the commit message with the change > > log to include > > the removal of kernel bot tags and addition of your review tag? > > No need, your patch has been added to i2c/i2c-host. Thanks for the clarification > Thanks, > Andi > > > > Best regards, > > > Krzysztof > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > Kanak Shilledar Thanks and Regards, Kanak Shilledar
