On Monday, September 30th, 2024 at 6:34 AM, Hridesh MG <hridesh699@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 8:11 AM Patrick Miller paddymills@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > After the latest revision of my patch 1, I split the if statement so that
> > there is a parent check for rust files for future rust patch checks. So,
> > this would perfectly fit within that block.
> >
> > Do you want me to add your code and credit you in my patch?
>
>
> Please disregard my prior email, I had failed to CC everyone. Since
> the change is small I'm okay with adding it as part of your patch,
> please do add the Co-developed-by tag, thanks!
>
> However, I was curious how conflicts like these are generally
> resolved. For example, if there are two large patchsets which conflict
> with each other, how does one ensure that they are compatible, and
> even if they are, how do the maintainers ensure that they are applied
> in the correct order?
2 changes that I am making to your patch as I merge it with mine (I tested these)
- Added a @fix option. I ran into this with my patch and was requested to
add it by a checkpatch maintainer
- Revised your $prevrawline regex to check against existing blank lines as
well as added blank lines (made the leading + optional). Otherwise I
think the checkpatch would not match against a blank doc comment line
added after an existing blank doc line.Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
