Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-221-gec32977366-fm-20230306.001-gec329773
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <adf72f73-23c9-4260-b649-755af4068a02@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <f21df56b-43b8-a48e-ab8f-e0cf2b163976@gmail.com>
References: <20230315072902.9298-1-ychuang570808@gmail.com>
 <f2699aa1-4d8a-48c0-b332-484db0b04252@app.fastmail.com>
 <1a1277ac-4ae5-eaab-01c3-0242c12be76b@gmail.com>
 <6ed7e89f-2d2c-4134-9c6f-a9d18e2fc8a8@app.fastmail.com>
 <a90fc6f6-df95-3a4f-da5b-ebdafbe7dd34@linaro.org>
 <f21df56b-43b8-a48e-ab8f-e0cf2b163976@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 18 Mar 2023 10:07:50 +0100
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To:     "Jacky Huang" <ychuang570808@gmail.com>,
        "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
        "Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, "Lee Jones" <lee@kernel.org>,
        "Michael Turquette" <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        "Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Jiri Slaby" <jirislaby@kernel.org>
Cc:     devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org,
        schung@nuvoton.com, "Jacky Huang" <ychuang3@nuvoton.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] Introduce Nuvoton ma35d1 SoC
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Mar 18, 2023, at 04:07, Jacky Huang wrote:
> On 2023/3/18 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=88 12:06, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 17/03/2023 14:21, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> I only now saw that you had already submitted this several times
>>> at the beginning of last year, and this is technically 'v5'
>>> of the series, and it would make sense to add 'v6' to the subject
>>> next time and link back to the previous [1] and this[2] submission
>>> on lore.kernel.org.
>> ... and address previous feedback. Or at least make it clear in
>> changelog that you addressed it, so our review was not ignored.
>>
>
> Of course, I will add back the changelog.
>
> And, I have a question. If subsequent modifications made to a patch,=20
> should the
>
> "Reviewed-by" still be valid? Can we keep it?

In general yes, but it's a bit of a grey area and you have
to apply common sense. Examples where I would drop the
Reviewed-by tag are

- if you changed something based on feedback from a reviewer and
  they provided a Reviewed-by tag based on that changed, but then
  another person asked you change the same thing differently, or
  back to the original version

- if you combine a patch with another one that was not also
  reviewed by the same person.

      Arnd