On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 12:43 PM wrote: >> On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, Rob Herring wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 10:12:07AM -0500, matthew.gerlach@linux.intel.com wrote: >>>> From: Matthew Gerlach >>>> >>>> Convert the device tree bindings for the Altera Root Port PCIe controller >>>> from text to YAML. Update the entries in the interrupt-map field to have >>>> the correct number of address cells for the interrupt parent. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Gerlach >>>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley >>>> --- >>>> v8: >>> >>> v2 or v8 or ??? I'm confused and tools will be too. >> >> Sorry for the confusion. Patch 1 and patch 2 were individually reviewed >> previously. Patch 1 was previously reviewed up to v8, and I included them >> in the greater patch set for convience and completeness, and this is v2 of >> the entire patch set. >> >> How should this be handled for better clarity? Would it be better to not >> to include Patch 1 and 2 in the patch set and refer to them, or would it >> better to remove the history in patch 1 and 2, or something else? > > Generally, if you added new patches you keep the versioning and say > "vN: new patch" in the new patches. Thanks for the clarification on the proper way to handle this. > > If this was 2 prior series, combined, there's not really a good answer > other than don't do that. Understood, I won't combine prior series in the future. > > Rob > Krzysztof Wilczyński has applied patch 1 and patch 2 to linux-next. Should I resubmit the patch set minus patch 1 and 2? There would be no changes to patches 3-7. Do I keep the v2, or should it be bumped to v3? Thanks, Matthew Gerlach