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;
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To:     Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
        benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org
Cc:     linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] powerpc: mute unused-but-set-variable warnings
In-Reply-To: <b3e7d016-74ca-aaaa-02e7-39fbc2200013@lca.pw>
References: <20190317220516.92654-1-cai@lca.pw> <1ffdc5ae-2d5f-6c81-3997-0e6c81c67516@c-s.fr> <b3e7d016-74ca-aaaa-02e7-39fbc2200013@lca.pw>
Date:   Wed, 20 Mar 2019 23:42:11 +1100
Message-ID: <877ectzpi4.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> writes:
> On 3/19/19 5:21 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Is there a reason for resending ? AFAICS, both are identical and still marked
>> new in patchwork:
>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?submitter=76055
>> 
>
> "RESEND" because of no maintainer response for more than one week.

I don't know who told you to RESEND after a week, but especially at this
point in the development cycle a week is *way* too short.

And for trivial patches like this I may not get to them for several
weeks, I have other problems to fix like time going backward :)

In future please check patchwork and then if the patch is still new
after several weeks just send a ping in reply to that patch. A full
RESEND means I now have two identical patches to deal with in patchwork,
which makes more work for me.

cheers