Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 24 Nov 2022 14:28:19 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: Re: [for-next][PATCH 05/11] tracing/osnoise: Add osnoise/options
 file
Message-ID: <20221124142819.44aeaed2@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <8cc1c8a0-7d2c-e653-2ab9-40d040eebbb3@kernel.org>
References: <20221124145019.782980678@goodmis.org>
        <20221124145046.156919074@goodmis.org>
        <8cc1c8a0-7d2c-e653-2ab9-40d040eebbb3@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 24 Nov 2022 18:31:22 +0100
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi Steve,

Hi Daniel,

> 
> Yesterday I sent a v2 of this patch series, adding some more options [1].

Heh, it came in the window of me triaging my patch queue and running my
tests.

> 
> But as you already queued these, and as there is no real difference from the
> v1 and v2 in these code patches, I think the best way is for me to send a v3
> with the additional patches, build on top of the ftrace/core.
> 
> (Is it a bad idea? let me know :-))

Just send patches on top, as these already went through testing, and I
don't want to rebase the branch.

Thanks!

-- Steve