Re: [PATCH REBASED] KVM: x86: SVM: Fix one redefine issue about VMCB_AVIC_APIC_BAR_MASK

[Sean Christopherson]

On Mon, 03 Apr 2023 17:52:00 +0800, korantwork@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> VMCB_AVIC_APIC_BAR_MASK is defined twice with the same value in svm.h,
> which is meaningless. Delete the duplicate one.

Applied to kvm-x86 svm, thanks!

In the future, please don't use "PATCH REBASED".  If you're sending a new
version of a patch that's been rebased, then the revision number needs to be
bumped.  The fact that the only change is that the patch was rebased isn't
relevant as far as versioning is concerned, it's still a new version.  The
cover letter and/or ignored part of the patch is where the delta between
versions should be captured.

And in this case, there really was no need to send a new version, the original
patch still applies cleanly.  I suspect that the REBASED version was sent as a
form of a ping, which again is not the right way to ping a patch/series.  If you
want to ping, please reply to the original patch.  Unnecessarily sending new
versions means more patches to sort through, i.e. makes maintainers lives harder,
not easier.

[1/1] KVM: x86: SVM: Fix one redefine issue about VMCB_AVIC_APIC_BAR_MASK
      https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/c0d0ce9b5a85

--
https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/tree/next
https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/tree/fixes