From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751854AbZGWAs2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:48:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750847AbZGWAs1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:48:27 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:43050 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750796AbZGWAs1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:48:27 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:47:41 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@suse.de, hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk, avi@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, aarcange@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ZERO PAGE again v4. Message-Id: <20090722174741.79743e3a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20090723093334.3166e9d2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20090709122428.8c2d4232.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090716180134.3393acde.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090723085137.b14fe267.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090722171245.d5b3a108.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090723093334.3166e9d2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:33:34 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > BTW, when I post new version, should I send a reply to old version to say > "this version is obsolete" ? Can it make your work easier ? like following. > > Re:[PATCH][Obsolete] new version weill come (Was.....) > > I tend to update patches until v5 or more until merged. Usually it's pretty clear when a new patch or patch series is going to be sent. I think that simply resending it all is OK. I don't pay much attention to the "version N" info either - it can be unreliable and not everyone does it and chronological ordering works OK for this. Very occasionally I'll merge a patch and then discover a later version further down through the backlog. But that's OK - I'll just update the patch. Plus I'm not usually stuck this far in the past. (I'm still trying to find half a day to read "Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v12")