Guenter, Comments are below On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Did you consider naming this file include/linux/it87.h as suggested ? > I thought that was a goodd idea. > This does seem to be a good idea. I had some other thoughts about where to place the it87_lock.c file. One thought was to move the lock into the drivers/mfd directory and completely decouple the lock from the watchdog or the hwmon directories. The mfd/Kconfig would contain the IT87_LOCK. > When you send out new versions of your patch set, it would be prudent > to list the patch version, as well as the changes made compared to previous I am new at this. Exactly where do you list the patch version. I put v2 in the subject line. The only difference between the 2 patch sets was that each of the patches has a more verbose body section explaining the contents of the patch and each of the sub patch Subject line reflected what was happening in that sub patch. I also made sure I had the "In-Reply-To" entry in the patches. Where in the patch do you discuss the changes made with respect to the previous patch. When I send out the next set of patches do I have to send out the entire patch set marked as v3. > versions of your patch. See Documents/SubmittingPatches, rule #2. > > Thanks, > Guenter -- Regards Nat Gurumoorthy AB6SJ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdog" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html