From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932995AbbCQRTV (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 13:19:21 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:50539 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932801AbbCQRTQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 13:19:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 17:19:06 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Fabian Frederick Cc: Tony Lindgren , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Joe Perches Message-ID: <20150317171906.GQ28806@sirena.org.uk> References: <1426533469-25458-1-git-send-email-fabf@skynet.be> <1426533469-25458-3-git-send-email-fabf@skynet.be> <20150317121128.GH28806@sirena.org.uk> <1489228275.7513.1426612212420.open-xchange@webmail.nmp.proximus.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4CM1oNDqiDLyatGS" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1489228275.7513.1426612212420.open-xchange@webmail.nmp.proximus.be> X-Cookie: Editing is a rewording activity. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.94.161 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/35 linux-next] regulator: constify of_device_id array X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --4CM1oNDqiDLyatGS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 06:10:12PM +0100, Fabian Frederick wrote: > Thanks Mark, I used a --cc-cmd script by Joe Perches with > git send-email which uses --nom for cover-letter. > This limits recipients to mailing lists: 37 instead of 123 in this case. > I guess it's better to reduce the noise :) Well, another thing to do if there's no dependencies is to just send each patch separately - there's no real relationship between the patches. This also avoids the issue. --4CM1oNDqiDLyatGS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVCGIJAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQSq8H/0wPmu2IEnTi0UjTEUDPgNPu AVfKpTycC5czxXZaMIG+F6sAuMWkv9K0OAkadOIjvYhOUXhLa1mFSAKr8fDoeoei LVvcMa5TJIrovvfYFl7CBfMhyZjRLQIxWmFAgtOXgmkuYw8cy3NahVKZyAnPxcsx BM6vSiet8X9ICT7BU+HsNjlnTs7fbBFk1bnbAW5vPVPU91JIVRjOOyGLGIMTqHsV gTa6ahm1znwIv3EaVMR7R7UxCHUUS/TnxXEFyRDxbPPpU/lZvgEMdxL3orglMgDM s3TKuuSnXyZ3PL+RnQ/9o+aBtxaLfrtGmrGKbKz6hen3u/qQ21+9VYv4WxML2Ks= =XfiZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4CM1oNDqiDLyatGS--