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;
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2023 10:19:09 +0200
Message-Id: <CTMFNWKMSCJP.DBPZEW25594L@otso>
To:     "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
        "Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>
Cc:     "Abel Vesa" <abel.vesa@linaro.org>,
        "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@kernel.org>,
        "Andy Gross" <agross@kernel.org>,
        "Bjorn Andersson" <andersson@kernel.org>,
        "Konrad Dybcio" <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        "Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        "Alim Akhtar" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
        "Avri Altman" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
        "Bart Van Assche" <bvanassche@acm.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] scsi: dt-bindings: ufs: qcom: Fix warning for
 sdm845 by adding reg-names
From:   "Luca Weiss" <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>
References: <20230623113009.2512206-1-abel.vesa@linaro.org>
 <20230623113009.2512206-6-abel.vesa@linaro.org>
 <cd84b8c6-fac7-ecef-26be-792a1b04a102@linaro.org>
 <CTK1AI4TVYRZ.F77OZB62YYC0@otso> <20230623211746.GA1128583-robh@kernel.org>
 <CTMDIQGOYMKD.1BP88GSB03U54@otso>
 <d3970163-b8e8-9665-3761-8942c28adaa8@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <d3970163-b8e8-9665-3761-8942c28adaa8@linaro.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon Jun 26, 2023 at 9:41 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 26/06/2023 08:38, Luca Weiss wrote:
> >>>> but I guess no resends and it can be superseded.
> >>>
> >>> Right, the patches got reviews but was never applied... I really need=
 to
> >>> find a strategy to keep track of sent patches until they're applied w=
ith
> >>> my work mailbox, it's not the first time that a patch has gotten
> >>> forgotten.
> >>
> >> There was an error reported on the above series. Why would it be=20
> >> applied?
> >=20
> > The error report at [0] complains about reg-names but I'm quite sure
> > that patch 2/3 resolves this error. Does your bot only apply one patch
> > at a time and run the check or apply all of them and then run it? It's
> > been a while but I'm fairly sure I ran all of the checks before sending
> > since I also documented some other patches in the cover letter there.
>
> You did it in cover letter, not in the patch, so there is no dependency
> for bots recorded.

I'm not aware how to put extra comments into a patch in a series with
b4, at least last time I checked I don't think it was possible? But I
also thought the cover letter was exactly there for giving some
background of the series and documenting any dependencies on other
patches.

>
> >=20
> > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/167241769341.1925758.178566816349494461=
14.robh@kernel.org/
>
> Your patch 2/3 could not be=C2=A0applied to any tree. 3/3 applied but wit=
hout
> previous one caused warnings.

Anyways, just resent the series as v4, maybe this time it can get picked
up... Should have enough reviews by now :)

Regards
Luca

>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof