Re: [PATCH 00/10] Add support for more Kontron i.MX6UL/ULL SoMs and boards

[Schrempf Frieder]

Hi Marco,

On 21.10.19 13:43, Marco Felsch wrote:
> Hi Frieder,
> 
> On 19-10-17 08:24, Schrempf Frieder wrote:
>> Hi Marco,
>>
>> On 17.10.19 10:14, Marco Felsch wrote:
>>> Hi Frieder,
>>>
>>> On 19-10-16 15:06, Schrempf Frieder wrote:
>>>> From: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> In order to support more of the i.MX6UL/ULL-based SoMs and boards by
>>>> Kontron Electronics GmbH, we restructure the devicetrees to share common
>>>> parts and add new devicetrees for the missing boards.
>>>>
>>>> Currently there are the following SoM flavors:
>>>>     * N6310: SoM with i.MX6UL-2, 256MB RAM, 256MB SPI NAND
>>>>     * N6311: SoM with i.MX6UL-2, 512MB RAM, 512MB SPI NAND (new)
>>>>     * N6411: SoM with i.MX6ULL, 512MB RAM, 512MB SPI NAND (new)
>>>>
>>>> Each of the SoMs also features 1MB SPI NOR and an Ethernet PHY. The carrier
>>>> board for the evalkit is the same for all SoMs.
>>>>
>>>> Frieder Schrempf (10):
>>>>     ARM: dts: imx6ul-kontron-n6310: Move common SoM nodes to a separate
>>>>       file
>>>>     ARM: dts: Add support for two more Kontron SoMs N6311 and N6411
>>>>     ARM: dts: imx6ul-kontron-n6310-s: Move common nodes to a separate file
>>>>     ARM: dts: Add support for two more Kontron evalkit boards 'N6311 S'
>>>>       and 'N6411 S'
>>>>     ARM: dts: imx6ul-kontron-n6x1x: Add 'chosen' node with 'stdout-path'
>>>>     ARM: dts: imx6ul-kontron-n6x1x-s: Specify bus-width for SD card and
>>>>       eMMC
>>>>     ARM: dts: imx6ul-kontron-n6x1x-s: Add vbus-supply and overcurrent
>>>>       polarity to usb nodes
>>>>     ARM: dts: imx6ul-kontron-n6x1x-s: Remove an obsolete comment and fix
>>>>       indentation
>>>>     dt-bindings: arm: fsl: Add more Kontron i.MX6UL/ULL compatibles
>>>>     MAINTAINERS: Add an entry for Kontron Electronics ARM board support
>>>
>>> Did you send all patches to same To: and Cc:?
>>
>> No, I have a script that runs get_maintainer.pl for each patch. So the
>> recipients might differ. I only had Krzysztof and Rob as hard-coded
>> recipients for the whole series.
>>
>> Do you think I should change this so each recipient receives the whole
>> series?
> 
> I do it that way because sometimes it is better for the reviewer to see
> the whole context.

Sounds reasonable. Thanks for the feedback.
Sometimes it just feels like it will cause a lot of useless mail traffic 
when sending all patches to all people suggested by get_maintainer.pl, 
but in general I agree, it is definitely useful to receive all the 
context. I might have to tweak my get_maintainer arguments, to trim the 
list of recipients and then send the whole series to these people.

Thanks,
Frieder