Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
Message-ID: <56b21cd8-7634-895e-6610-2a087ce8fc13@nfschina.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Dec 2023 11:33:36 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.8.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] scsi: aic7xxx: fix some problem of return value
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Cc:     hare@suse.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com,
        linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
From:   Su Hui <suhui@nfschina.com>
In-Reply-To: <d37560ef-d67f-4493-a7bf-1d192ff7351d@suswa.mountain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2023/12/1 15:53, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 10:59:53AM +0800, Su Hui wrote:
>> v2:
>>   - fix some problems and split v1 patch into this patch set.(Thanks to
>>     Dan)
>>
>> v1:
>>   - https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231130024122.1193324-1-suhui@nfschina.com/
>>
> Would have been better with Fixes tags probably.  Otherwise, it looks
> good to me.

Hi, Dan

Sorry for the late reply.

I'm not sure if it's worth to add Fixes tags.
These codes are very old which come from "Linux-2.6.12-rc2".
It's seems like a cleanup or improvement.

Umm, should I send v3 patches to add Fixes tags?

Su Hui