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:   Tue, 25 Jul 2023 10:55:41 -0700
From:   Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
To:     Raghu Halharvi <raghuhack78@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, ira.weiny@intel.com,
        bwidawsk@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
        vishal.l.verma@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v6 0/2] Fixing check patch styling issues
Message-ID: <ZMAMnd8Pg5vGKKH7@aschofie-mobl2>
References: <20230725121930.3732-1-raghuhack78@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230725121930.3732-1-raghuhack78@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:19:28PM +0000, Raghu Halharvi wrote:
> v6 changes:
> - PATCH RESEND, the v5 was approved was not committed, Ira suggested to
>   resend both patches.

Hi Raghu,

If this was a true RESEND, the version number should not have changed.
See: Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst

Alas, this v6 has changes from v5 that are not listed here, so this
is not a RESEND, it is a new version.

Both patches were rebased, and in Patch 1 that led to a changed
function name too.

What to do? 
How about you send a reply to this cover letter with the v5->v6
changelog, and let's see if that's clear enough.

Thanks,
Alison


> 
> v5 changes:
> - Updated the missing reviewed tag in "cxl/mbox: Remove redundant
>   dev_err() after failed mem alloc" patch (Dave Jiang)
> 
> v4 changes:
> - Updated the respective patches with reviewers tags for respective
>   patches(Dave Jiang)
> 
> v3 changes:
> - Update the cover letter and commit message with full author
>   name(Fabio/Alison)
> - Correct the "typo error" in commit message(Fabio)
> 
> v2 changes:
> Thanks Alison, Ira for your comments, modified the v1 patches as
> suggested.
> Dropped the patch containing tab changes in port.c
> 
> v1 cover letter:
> The following patches are cleanup or fixing the styling issues found
> using checkpatch
> 
> In cxl/core/mbox.c, in case of null check failure, returning errno or
> -ENOMEM in this case is good enough, removing the redundant dev_err
> message.
> 
> In cxl/core/region.c, the else is not required after the return
> statement, cleaned it up.
> 
> Verified the build and sanity by booting the guest VM using the freshly
> built components.
> 
> Raghu Halharvi (2):
>   cxl/mbox: Remove redundant dev_err() after failed mem alloc
>   cxl/region: Remove else after return statement
> 
>  drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c   | 4 +---
>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c | 8 ++++----
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.39.2
>