From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E60C4338F for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 11:44:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAE446109F for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 11:44:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238837AbhHSLo5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:44:57 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:33610 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238449AbhHSLoz (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:44:55 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7DF0361051; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 11:44:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1629373459; bh=e3lEhURg/hiaUb35KU1h6MRMH1E0R15z8wlq3UiVLq8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=CPsJpOklS9cft3N7j6zhJRUJEKu6LqlhSot5JArR0YYMwNX9phr7a2rZaCQFce4Th A+FAff0Jm2ITTdnvI6LDyOAEvGLhamY7fdAzKPpJC8oAibh4/o6WVdsObhCrUFBRGw YlnrwdV5eR08ODe+398DNcwijThRRJcrBvAzRpUtWYNMNgMbrNoroQRSKXEaribBNB uxYmV3JdMJmrxGNFfUPjBZI3kWH7VcQ2NAPtTaffBI4/FG+RIG4YRDKw4fRZmqRhPU ZqQt6OKiXFdTRqQNSCRr/5Ez74GuWi2/97Uk1HP2qpFZZO6b3myeVB2EwhC6qufdww j3oCIZ9q+KNrA== Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 12:43:54 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Matti Vaittinen Cc: Liam Girdwood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Minor regulator documentation fixes. Message-ID: <20210819114354.GL4177@sirena.org.uk> References: <20210818041513.GA2408290@dc7vkhyh15000m40t6jht-3.rev.dnainternet.fi> <20210818121709.GD4177@sirena.org.uk> <67f6596f54fd2ea168d71d0747ea4a521dda5384.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DXIF1lRUlMsbZ3S1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <67f6596f54fd2ea168d71d0747ea4a521dda5384.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> X-Cookie: She sells cshs by the cshore. User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --DXIF1lRUlMsbZ3S1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 08:06:48AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > I was thinking of that. I thought that it made less of a hassle with > single patch. After all, both changes were doc updates - and I didn't > think the typofix warranted backport or a Fixed tag. > Could you please educate me & explain why would you have preferred two > patches? (I see you any ways applied this so I guess there's no need to > split & resend - thanks). It's two changes that don't overlap in any way. Part of the reason for splitting patches up is that it reduces the cogantive load checking that the patch actually does the thing described in the changelog, with two changes in one patch you need to hold two things in your head at once. The more trivial the patch the bigger the extra effort relative to what they'd have taken otherwise. --DXIF1lRUlMsbZ3S1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmEeQ/oACgkQJNaLcl1U h9AltAf9Ej13ZF+d5Wy72pVod8tcqx7VTXN7OhakcB6z16Z3La0hx/UncCmqrAdH nBQOHdFkIU2sHqX8nJ5FAm5M38TvAm9g2yFBzzBWcGIJqRapDTYdpVpTDOA2hmng y+RR6wdPXdp/E2N3iAurTpn/6DZESW2J54XXKLdI5Ky4EK923TUO+UE2iM/bTC7w 3v/NwGQOWCZAA5DwoTTHYOOgROJy+n3VEl/Ebk3+IWJqGd+pnisam+rQzgLI1+6m +w8dzZl369pyFF26HJ26wGLT33DUWUbEaL7wk76VL3pxKgmryPZ0QlfLu4EBQJf2 U9WUfCnrxZN0RqH9UDKtn2TWYCLW1w== =XLeD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DXIF1lRUlMsbZ3S1--