From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 162C8C6778C for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 08:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81F42083E for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 08:47:29 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C81F42083E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=fi.rohmeurope.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934400AbeGDIrZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2018 04:47:25 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com ([209.85.208.195]:36253 "EHLO mail-lj1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932439AbeGDIrV (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2018 04:47:21 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id u7-v6so1046522lji.3; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 01:47:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=c/kWDpyT9bKPRvJ2jE8oXnJjcrosdXbsZQrzuJOoqXU=; b=p1PalngmbAO2d7xe6KZ6dTz3hk6/k5eEPYw4DpDOf9MOBBjJdx5Od8LZzwKPQ4+bs+ vOBqYj7GiaU3vxpsOudN+Ia4ic0uz0MdIR6g8VD6mUb1vk0okOzzILIFUGt3dOeW3oo/ n1FeRp2qVH5EOgfv5MGhhW65s55TOGtVGyxTcSnb7AyMMdKFwvc5Hb/Paz8vf11icFxf QG2+iR3d+/gb7jwtyZZ6Cv5LY717RftK7aAWStBkl3SO76ElV3qGNZLf0TtL1A2pEiMh o3WNPQJU3nDAh6jC59Vo9LPtXjZgULeWG6eLoZO6Jg/Q/ayw9uWlulgW6F+Y61aGiizD 6JNw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1yxD0mOvNhx/Uxf9OCfYJGyL4DiNnz6/58K0yR61W9pyAvD5pu FcXMNsNlLFf2fg5dXqKuU3g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeUlsOi55KhsX3nGpe5mNye6r4+BrZFuipGFfU9HkX2FSjqsNDn2ExseDodwU5IFCl1FA2CCQ== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:3c13:: with SMTP id j19-v6mr925258lja.149.1530694039934; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 01:47:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (82-203-190-178.bb.dnainternet.fi. [82.203.190.178]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l139-v6sm684174lfl.67.2018.07.04.01.47.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 04 Jul 2018 01:47:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 11:47:15 +0300 From: Matti Vaittinen To: Lee Jones Cc: mturquette@baylibre.com, sboyd@kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, mazziesaccount@gmail.com, arnd@arndb.de, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, sre@kernel.org, chenjh@rock-chips.com, andrew.smirnov@gmail.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org, kstewart@linuxfoundation.org, heiko@sntech.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, mikko.mutanen@fi.rohmeurope.com, heikki.haikola@fi.rohmeurope.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/4] mfd/regulator/clk/input: bd71837: ROHM BD71837 PMIC driver Message-ID: <20180704084715.GI2118@localhost.localdomain> References: <20180621103400.GB6076@localhost.localdomain> <20180703070200.GC20176@dell> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180703070200.GC20176@dell> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 08:02:00AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jun 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 01:55:31PM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > Patch series adding support for ROHM BD71837 PMIC. > > > > > What is the preferred way when I send updated patches: > > > > 1. always resend _all_ unapplied patches even if there is no changes to > > some of them. (patch-vN mail thread contains _all_ unapplied patches) > > 2. only resend changed patches (patch-vN mail thread contains only > > patches that were changed from patch-vN-1) > > > > I have currently used approach 1 - so that no patches would be > > accidentally forgotten - but downside is that people need to check if > > they have already reviewed some of the patches. I'd rather not caused > > any extra work. What is the most convenient way for you guys? > > Option 1 is preferred. > > Just ensure you apply any tags you have collected so reviewers can see > which patches are pending a review. It's also a good idea to keep a > succinct change log between the "--" marker and the diff stat where > you can state "v4: No change" or the like. Right. Thanks. Just one question - what if I get reviewed-by for a patch which I later rework? Like this MFD patch where I got reviewed-by from Linus Walleij for v6 - but which I reworked due to comments from Enric and Dmitry. I have not kept the reviewed-by as the patch is not exactly the same Linus was originally reviewing. I guess the tags should be only kept for patches which are unchanged, right? > > -- > Lee Jones [李琼斯] > Linaro Services Technical Lead > Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs > Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog