Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:03:54 +0000 | From | Lee Jones <> | Subject | Re: mfd: smsc-ece1099: Fine-tuning for smsc_i2c_probe() |
| |
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Do you request that I should resend my four update suggestions > >> for different components as a single patch series for the software > >> area "drivers/mfd"? > > > > You have to make that decision yourself. > > I chose on 2015-12-29 to send them in the combination you see.
That was not a good choice.
> > What I'm saying is, if the cover letter says there are 2 patches > > These refer to the component "smsc-ece1099".
That's fine. Then there should have been 2 patches in the set. But then to attach 2 unrelated patches to the set is not fine. They should have either been submitted as part of the set i.e. 0/4 or completely separately.
> > in the set, that's what we should expect. > > Can changes for the components "dm355evm_msp" and "twl-core" > be clarified independently?
Yes, or together would have also been fine. The only think that is not okay is to submit a set of 2 patches, then to "bolt-on" another 2 for some reason.
-- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
| |