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, 23 Mar 2023 18:32:54 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
To:     Khadija Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
Cc:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>, outreachy@lists.linux.dev,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 0/4] staging: rtl8192e: code cleanup patches
Message-ID: <1973548d-e76e-4512-bed4-792c95b59c12@kili.mountain>
References: <cover.1679573474.git.kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2303231408000.2866@hadrien>
 <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2303231408410.2866@hadrien>
 <090ee842-46d0-4f35-bf00-68a3e1393b72@kili.mountain>
 <ZBxu5RBG9kCRlwRB@khadija-virtual-machine>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZBxu5RBG9kCRlwRB@khadija-virtual-machine>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 08:23:17PM +0500, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 04:34:43PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 02:08:58PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> > > > > staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c
> > > >
> > > > Why is it resent?
> > > 
> > > OK, I see, sorry for the noise.
> > 
> > I'm still confused...  :P
> >
> 
> Hey Dan!
> 
> Sorry about the confusion. I sent the last patch with the wrong email
> mistakenly. It was causing following warning as reported by Philipp,
> Checkpatch:
> 
> WARNING: From:/Signed-off-by: email address mismatch: 'From: Khadija
> Kamran <kkamran.bese16seecs@seecs.edu.pk>' != 'Signed-off-by: Khadija
> Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
> 
> I resent this patch with the correct email address. I hope I did not do
> this wrong.

It needs to be v2: resend from the correct email address.

When you send a patch a second time that always needs to be explained
because we don't remember all the email we get.  The v2 information is
really interesting as a reviewer.  Maybe I am wondering, "Did I respond
to the original email and is my complaint fixed?"

For RESEND patches it means that the first patch was perfect but
something broke down in the process.  Maybe a maintainer was on vacation
and accidentally ignored the patch.  If Greg asks you to resend
everything that's a kind of breakdown in the process as well, but just
add that information in the patch "Resending all the most/ patches
because it was confusing which one were supposed to be applied".

That information is super interesting because it shows we are all on the
same page about how to go forward.

regards,
dan carpenter