Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-110718-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <7f7866f8-514b-4659-920a-30b566ad157d@turingpi.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 16:00:53 -0600
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [RESEND RFC PATCH 0/5] Enhancements for mv64xxx I2C driver
Content-Language: en-US
To: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>
Cc: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <CAF8uH3tYaUwhkkeFuY+PdsnSPqeTtWtOsB_hy9oOjF=f-2Hdaw@mail.gmail.com>
 <p37qqpplxgmfzlq6wz7fvmvnrsumy6ra5nivzi4hd2gbvlbezx@dlh6ygyjbk24>
 <4a043be8-8e88-4b92-913c-abd8f138b90d@turingpi.com>
 <wdpnjnuahedvbakhfavoobukdkocjfpfrgsu374sgjhkyy7exz@er4lyeadftyz>
From: Sam Edwards <sam@turingpi.com>
In-Reply-To: <wdpnjnuahedvbakhfavoobukdkocjfpfrgsu374sgjhkyy7exz@er4lyeadftyz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Andi,

On 3/21/24 14:54, Andi Shyti wrote:
> so that it's the [RFC v2 ...] the right series... are you sure?

[RESEND v2 RFC ...] -- it's the second resend (thus third send), not the 
second RFC (in retrospect I definitely should have used # instead of v)

> 
> 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.

Patch 0 was probably separated by the lack of threading but can be found 
here: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg68235.html

There is no changelog as there were no changes to the patch content vs. 
either of the first two sending attempts; I was only trying a different 
way of navigating the minefield of mail agents that make whitespace 
changes without my consent. :)

> 
> ...
> 
>>> 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

Thanks again,
Sam