Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 7 Oct 2023 20:25:55 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 00/10] Add Milk-V Pioneer RISC-V board support | From | Chen Wang <> |
| |
On 2023/10/7 19:04, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Sat, Oct 07, 2023 at 06:58:51PM +0800, Chen Wang wrote: >> On 2023/10/7 18:17, Conor Dooley wrote: >>> On Sat, Oct 07, 2023 at 03:52:04PM +0800, Chen Wang wrote: >>>> From: Chen Wang <unicorn_wang@outlook.com> >>>> >>>> Milk-V Pioneer [1] is a developer motherboard based on SOPHON SG2042 [2] >>>> in a standard mATX form factor. Add minimal device >>>> tree files for the SG2042 SOC and the Milk-V Pioneer board. >>>> >>>> Now only support basic uart drivers to boot up into a basic console. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Chen >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Changes in v5: >>>> The patch series is based on v6.6-rc1. You can simply review or test >>>> the patches at the link [7]. >>>> - dts: changed plic to support external interrupt >>>> - pickup improvements from Conor, details refer to [8]. >>> Did you? I only see them partially picked up. I'll just replace patch 8 >>> with the patch 8 from this series I think. >> Yes, only the patch 8 of this series(v5) is updated for plic node. For other >> patches, I just cherry-picked them from previous "sophon" branch. > But added my signoff? I ended up seeing my signoff on the patch where I > disagreed with the commit message, which was confusing to me.
Oh, I used to think I can keep the exising signoff and I didn't mean to add it. Anyway, I agree your suggestion to create a new patch with only one change should be better, I will follow this in later work.
Regarding your changes on sg2042 series, I have acked in another email : https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/MA0P287MB0332BA73D0135CC73CAEA16DFEC8A@MA0P287MB0332.INDP287.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM/. If anything else required, please feel free let me know.
Thanks,
Chen
> >> BTW, what I did this time may be a bit redundant. I would like to ask, if I >> encounter a similar situation in the future (that is, only one patch needs >> to be modified, and the others remain unchanged), is there a better way to >> submit the patchset? > You could have sent the plic change as a incremental change on top. So a > new patch with just that one change in it. > > Thanks, > Conor.
| |