From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754114AbbFDRGv (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2015 13:06:51 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:42530 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752103AbbFDRGt (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jun 2015 13:06:49 -0400 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 18:06:40 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Nariman Poushin Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com Message-ID: <20150604170640.GN14071@sirena.org.uk> References: <20150601092012.GA31354@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20150602181512.GC14071@sirena.org.uk> <20150604142118.GA12548@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Hh0bd0om1WS2KCoe" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150604142118.GA12548@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> X-Cookie: The end of labor is to gain leisure. 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: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch 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 --Hh0bd0om1WS2KCoe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline 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. --Hh0bd0om1WS2KCoe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVcIWgAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQVs4H/23quOOutue9wJX5kpQ6VCz7 /L7ESk+WJb0ZZPmGgiljBWF845Q2qZSb/5Tz++jD5qJiLuPE25wyWQXGL/AsR++V V6LndjG9a93Y7Ue6VI3xkfvyz7Ve52JAthPQdzFqfYrt5tCwC9i28zpS/doRY0BE qksnA7cysTNp3qjomJ+12RfPOliPDjwyg2OEnIWOwszostjtGj+MwGYmNQ+2JqGz 1/ccPJL+aoOmZwvs3QRkN2DH4t5RrT2tc0n9Nns3PK21Ipza5fh7nwOLiz/13soV T3/5LUPNv77rUKHnstcMGG5X5wZiExV2NeRBMTPBBPrJNAHXDsSTY5DSvNyiAbI= =bCmL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Hh0bd0om1WS2KCoe--