Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 28 Dec 2018 21:25:04 -0800
From:   "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc:     Tom Psyborg <pozega.tomislav@gmail.com>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD
Message-ID: <20181229052504.GA16315@magnolia>
References: <1545555435-24576-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
 <CAKR_QVJefW1vxYb7-qiU8=0YdbFghYo15SK2eGjOC-dntRfyYA@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1812232304130.2940@hadrien>
 <CAKR_QVLeZBL43W4x1mzcfcakSZyyh9L81vgUMxfnSccKawEfdg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181227134055.GA2272@kadam>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181227134055.GA2272@kadam>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 04:40:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 11:12:20PM +0100, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> > there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
> > more than enough
> > 
> 
> I don't know who you were discussing this with...
> 
> You should CC the 0th patch to all the mailinglists.  That much is a
> clear rule.
> 
> For the rest, Julia's position is the more conservative one.  I was in
> a conversation in RL and they were like, "CC everyone for all the
> patches".  It depends on the context, of course.  If the patches are
> dependent on each other then you *have* to CC everyone for everything.

Agreed.  Ms. Lawall, sending "Cover letter + all relevant XFS patches"
(as you did) was exactly the right thing for us xfs types. :)

For that matter, we prefer to receive through linux-xfs more patches
than necessary (one can send the entire series if one is unsure) than to
go wanting for more context.

--D

> If we really have other clear rules, then it should be encoded into
> get_maintainer.pl so that it's automatic.
> 
> My other question is why do the linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> people feel like they need to be CC'd about every driver???  I always
> remove them from the CC list unless it's an arch/arm issue.
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 
> PS:  Please, no more top posting.
>