Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201001161340.GM6715@sirena.org.uk> <CGME20201001182315eucas1p1b1fc9d5d0ea91db6e56e92d5cf2583e5@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
 <dleftjft6xg60r.fsf%l.stelmach@samsung.com> <20201001190257.GA11048@kozik-lap>
 <20201001194339.GX6715@sirena.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20201001194339.GX6715@sirena.org.uk>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 2 Oct 2020 08:18:35 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPe+w=mYfX9PaG=FXt5mWPqBiqe833mdetCQWca+H_nXSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND 0/9] Some fixes for spi-s3c64xx
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Lukasz Stelmach <l.stelmach@samsung.com>,
        Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>, Andi Shyti <andi@etezian.org>,
        linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?QmFydMWCb21pZWogxbtvxYJuaWVya2lld2ljeg==?= 
        <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 at 21:44, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 09:02:57PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>
> > That is correct. We did not provide final comments on the list so they
> > could be added here - in change log. This would also be an explanation
> > why there is a resend. Another solution would be to extend the commit #7
> > description - why only CMU case is covered.
>
> If there's a new changelog then it's not a resend, the changelog is part
> of the content so I'd expect a version bump for that alone.  IIRC the
> changelog needed some clarification anyway?

Yes, documenting the non-CMU case in changeloge would be good. It
should be also v3 because of another reason: two patches got reordered
to a more meaningful position in patchset, which brought minor
differences in them.

Best regards,
Krzysztof