On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 10:50 AM shangxiaojing <shangxiaojing@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2022/9/19 15:45, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 4:43 AM shangxiaojing <shangxiaojing@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 2022/9/17 16:21, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 5:12 AM Shang XiaoJing <shangxiaojing@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... > >>> First of all, this brings even more confusion. Since the below needs > >>> some work, we want to have a v4 with a proper changelog, explaining > >>> also v1 and v3. > >> Ok, I 'll figure out a more clear changelog. > >> > >> Besides, v3 is my miss, please ignore it, next patch will be v2. > > Versioning should go only one direction. You confuse people with your > > versioning schema. > > Should I send the sent patch "[PATCH -next v2] staging: fwserial: Switch > to kfree_rcu() API" again as v4? Yes, and explain in the changelog all of the previous ones, like v3: the first version of the patch v1: v3 resent as v1 v2: changed kv... to k... v4: resend as v4 to avoid versioning confusion -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
