On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 01:14:37PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 01:06:19PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

> > OK, I can do that for the KVM stuff - I've been actively trying to keep
> > the patches separate where there's no dependencies between them as it
> > avoids things getting caught up in review for more complicated stuff or
> > cases where someone decides they want extra cleanup while we're at it
> > which is especially useful when only some of the series is needed for
> > building on top of as is the case here.

> I get what you're saying, but I still it find it much easier to get a
> series of independent but functionally-related patches with a cover letter.
> I usually end up cherry-picking the ones that are ready to go, so then
> there's no need to respin those.

I see - I'd not seen that happening with the arch/arm64 stuff, more the
opposite, so I was working on that basis.