Christian Schoenebeck wrote on Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 04:55:17PM +0100: > On Monday, December 5, 2022 11:41:55 PM CET Dominique Martinet wrote: > > Christian Schoenebeck wrote on Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:40:06PM +0100: > > > Dominique, looking at your 9p queue, I just realized what happened here: I > > > posted a v2 of these two patches, which got lost for some reason: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1669144861.git.linux_oss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > > The currently queued 1st patch is still v1 as well. > > > > Oh. Now how did I manage that one.. > > Thanks for the catch, and v2 had the valid printf modifier... > > You remember updating the 1st patch as well, right? :) It looks up to date to me, e.g. zc is added at the end of the p9_fcall structure. (and these are the only two patches you sent, right? :D) > In general, I'm sure nobody complains about extra noise like "queued on...". > Then it's also more likely for other people to get which patches are still > pending or unseen. I usually apply the patch locally when writing a note about 'taking the patch for x' -- but the problem is my workflow is pretty manual to say the least (piping mail to base64, base64 to git am on another machine...); and I'm not always taking the time to run tests immediately so not pushing right away to -next, so I assume I took your patches early and looked back when testing after you sent v2 and they were there so did't notice :/ I guess I need to pull the tree back and script a reply from the last link or something; so you'll notice the reply is on v1 in this case? but it'll be a pain to get the subject back like e.g. pwbot does for netdev... hmm.. I'll think about what I can do. -- Dominique