Re: [PATCH v7 0/4] mfd/regulator/clk/input: bd71837: ROHM BD71837 PMIC driver

[Matti Vaittinen]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 08:02:00AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 01:55:31PM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > > Patch series adding support for ROHM BD71837 PMIC.
> > > 
> > What is the preferred way when I send updated patches:
> > 
> > 1. always resend _all_ unapplied patches even if there is no changes to
> >    some of them. (patch-vN mail thread contains _all_ unapplied patches)
> > 2. only resend changed patches (patch-vN mail thread contains only
> >    patches that were changed from patch-vN-1)
> > 
> > I have currently used approach 1 - so that no patches would be
> > accidentally forgotten - but downside is that people need to check if
> > they have already reviewed some of the patches. I'd rather not caused
> > any extra work. What is the most convenient way for you guys?
> 
> Option 1 is preferred.
> 
> Just ensure you apply any tags you have collected so reviewers can see
> which patches are pending a review.  It's also a good idea to keep a
> succinct change log between the "--" marker and the diff stat where
> you can state "v4: No change" or the like.

Right. Thanks. Just one question - what if I get reviewed-by for a
patch which I later rework? Like this MFD patch where I got reviewed-by
from Linus Walleij for v6 - but which I reworked due to comments from
Enric and Dmitry. I have not kept the reviewed-by as the patch is not
exactly the same Linus was originally reviewing. I guess the tags should
be only kept for patches which are unchanged, right?
> 
> -- 
> Lee Jones [æçæ]
> Linaro Services Technical Lead
> Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
> Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog