Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] mtd: spinand: Add support for GigaDevice GD5F1GQ4UFxxG

[Jeff Kletsky]

(reduced direct addressees, though still on lists)

On 5/22/19 11:42 PM, Schrempf Frieder wrote:

> On 23.05.19 00:05, Jeff Kletsky wrote:
> > From: Jeff Kletsky <git-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The GigaDevice GD5F1GQ4UFxxG SPI NAND is in current production devices
> > and, while it has the same logical layout as the E-series devices,
> > it differs in the SPI interfacing in significant ways.
> >
> > This support is contingent on previous commits to:
> >
> >     * Add support for two-byte device IDs
> >     * Define macros for page-read ops with three-byte addresses
> >
> > http://www.gigadevice.com/datasheet/gd5f1gq4xfxxg/
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Kletsky <git-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Frieder Schrempf <frieder.schrempf@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> I dont't think that this Reported-by tag should be used here. The bot
> reported build errors caused by your patch and you fixed it in a new
> version. As far as I understand this tag, it references someone who
> reported a flaw/bug that led to this change in the first place.
> The version history of the changes won't be visible in the git history
> later, but the tag will be and would be rather confusing.

Thank you for your patience and explanations. I've been being conservative
as I'm not a "seasoned, Linux professional" and am still getting my
git send-email config / command line for Linux properly straightened out.

Should I send another patch set with the `kbuild...` tag removed,
or would it be removed in the process of an appropriate member
of the Linux MTD team adding their tag for approval, if and when
that happens?

Jeff