mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Nariman Poushin <nariman@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 18:06:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150604170640.GN14071@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150604142118.GA12548@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1143 bytes --]

On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 03:21:19PM +0100, Nariman Poushin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:15:13PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > You need to squash the changes in since they break bisection if handled
> > separately.  It would be better to do this by having a separate patch to
> > add the newly named structure rather than adding the new functionality
> > at the same time.  That makes the patch more mechanical and easier to
> > review.

> Ok, I have a patch set ready (as you described) but I am having some
> problem deciding on the correct distribution, the squashed patch that
> touches a whole bunch of subsystems ends up with a monstrous
> get_maintainer.pl output, so even going through and checking
> MAINTAINERS I have ended up with a large list (26 individuals and lists).

> Is this ok? I am not sure if it is going to get bounced by mail servers
> as spam or whether it's bad etiquette to do this, but as you say
> we don't want to break the bisection.

Probably post individual patches for people to look at but make it clear
that they need to go in as a single API change patch rather than be
applied in the commit message.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2015-06-04 17:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-01  9:20 Nariman Poushin
2015-06-02 18:15 ` Mark Brown
2015-06-04 14:21   ` Nariman Poushin
2015-06-04 17:06     ` Mark Brown [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150604170640.GN14071@sirena.org.uk \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nariman@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®