Received: by 2002:ab2:6857:0:b0:1ef:ffd0:ce49 with SMTP id l23csp731870lqp; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 13:54:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCUe97OE29aGaVzrTi0WMt9PuKah6x1SaEk8Iqdtf8HSeYC/7R4RQvZvWJP6YkM8kfxFWpAd7cepJ8jH3YjCuxaZjLzv5p7F3hfzduhq0A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFMTQRTCt8XhwhyuDaurEQ18fpDx3GMuZELc//EoNPj+y6zQBhy/+2PKe6dDjnzu61xlqbO X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:c83:b0:6e6:bc50:bb90 with SMTP id a3-20020a056a000c8300b006e6bc50bb90mr636915pfv.34.1711054493316; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 13:54:53 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from sv.mirrors.kernel.org (sv.mirrors.kernel.org. [2604:1380:45e3:2400::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u3-20020a632343000000b005eb4d2501c7si492220pgm.693.2024.03.21.13.54.53 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 Mar 2024 13:54:53 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-110672-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=LdBGofkv; arc=fail (body hash mismatch); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-110672-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-110672-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sv.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 039F92831C6 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 20:54:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 942E613541E; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 20:54:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="LdBGofkv" Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B47A11350EF; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 20:54:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711054488; cv=none; b=u7PU/BkomAszaV+STDOlfiLQrbTamhvsJ6N7TfxONphedkdweZhRYOKxuoegBQUXeR/cHetfPDFoxreQVvsiPs0ger9dixo8pRDXFEnB/KgJry6MxNDjV+obDRitbqKq3tcuZCJ65Jfp9cpLsKveKoFqpIOB8Annfxatp6GwEzg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711054488; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AlXcd6BU1PdgV9t1OUjfyQ8MP4DXyg5Bru1eSL7IS1Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=E7ASiY81exvvFDqr6MYK5Ww2O7T1V9Ne1ZXCeX5RJs1gWFZpwswdUO8f03jR+vy1FHyc5leGaadEn+JufKTpldKbkbUTh0q/aIrjrM+dRWbcNQ8K2zc5cQ8y8KFkmbx9tv8UQZHmF2PcbAqXbOIBJvRaBjSvHuePdvCfGW5dIVM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=LdBGofkv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E539C433F1; Thu, 21 Mar 2024 20:54:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1711054488; bh=AlXcd6BU1PdgV9t1OUjfyQ8MP4DXyg5Bru1eSL7IS1Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=LdBGofkv8EeV/a9BMklXeGE/imMgVO7CfjHf4g6tgRcHGEy0R/kdidNwDKXjzOOWn BjFLBfQNYQeTWPJdxi057nTzyYaCQTm0rkA89EEdTISdAbA4j3yHdig+Sx6HQjadZj ZtHSAZCBb/n5L78pYh7bfQop5DO0I5TAyZrz7VmbHfrM9Qxmx9XFyXC37je21ETVV9 yASzG7gFd1ViikML1rfRnbPX/pkEfCN8zr+2p0mkLt9FdqG7CEHtVzVSgNi6iPrVJV Kf6LM3ZFwW1uj/hNguArJ9YrIWQ0qiWYcDQsVnK2s3n2uw9fFCCCIoAUSAOzymlHDn PlygkW4iV+tZg== Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 21:54:43 +0100 From: Andi Shyti To: Sam Edwards Cc: Gregory CLEMENT , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RESEND RFC PATCH 0/5] Enhancements for mv64xxx I2C driver Message-ID: References: <4a043be8-8e88-4b92-913c-abd8f138b90d@turingpi.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4a043be8-8e88-4b92-913c-abd8f138b90d@turingpi.com> Hi Sam, On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 12:24:43AM -0600, Sam Edwards wrote: > On 3/20/24 20:28, Andi Shyti wrote: > > > Sorry about the resend; it seems my mail client "helpfully" swallowed the > > > newlines on any line consisting only of whitespace, garbling the patches. > > > > I received three series from you: > > > > 1. [RESEND v2 RFC 1/5] i2c: mv64xxx: Clear bus errors before transfer > > 2. [RFC PATCH 0/5] Enhancements for mv64xxx I2C driver > > 3. [RESEND RFC PATCH 0/5] Enhancements for mv64xxx I2C driver > > > > By the versioning, 1. is good, the rest is not good. Standing to > > the time sent and comments in patch '0', 3. is good, the rest > > not. > > > > Which one should be discarded? Can you please state it clearly? .. > I sent the series in the order 2-3-1, so 1 is the version to look at (though > I made no content changes between resends as I was only fighting my mail > client's formatting). so that it's the [RFC v2 ...] the right series... are you sure? The order of arrival is: 1. Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 16:51:51 -0600 2. Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 19:40:51 -0600 3. Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:19:53 -0600 Anyway, I will take "1" as the good one, being a v2. I will discard "2" and "3". Then, please, do not forget next time the patch 0 and the changelog. .. > > Can you please make sure, next time (unless someone asks to > > resend them again), that the patches are threaded? You can send > > them to yourself first and see if they are really threaded. > > Yes, definitely. I take it from your phrasing that you're willing to collect > the scattered mails yourself this one time only? If so, thank you for > cleaning up after my mess. :) > > If not (and/or if someone else doesn't like the mess), I can always resend. > I have already made one cleanup (removing the useless `default:` at the end > of the FSM) so I guess it would technically be an "RFC v2" at this point. For now no need to resend (unless someone complains). Let's give it some time for review. Andi