Re: [PATCH 5/5] scsi: dt-bindings: ufs: qcom: Fix warning for sdm845 by adding reg-names

[Luca Weiss]

On Tue Jun 27, 2023 at 5:18 PM CEST, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 10:19:09AM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > On Mon Jun 26, 2023 at 9:41 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 26/06/2023 08:38, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > >>>> but I guess no resends and it can be superseded.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Right, the patches got reviews but was never applied... I really need to
> > > >>> find a strategy to keep track of sent patches until they're applied with
> > > >>> my work mailbox, it's not the first time that a patch has gotten
> > > >>> forgotten.
> > > >>
> > > >> There was an error reported on the above series. Why would it be 
> > > >> applied?
> > > > 
> > > > The error report at [0] complains about reg-names but I'm quite sure
> > > > that patch 2/3 resolves this error. Does your bot only apply one patch
> > > > at a time and run the check or apply all of them and then run it? It's
> > > > been a while but I'm fairly sure I ran all of the checks before sending
> > > > since I also documented some other patches in the cover letter there.
> > >
> > > You did it in cover letter, not in the patch, so there is no dependency
> > > for bots recorded.
> > 
> > I'm not aware how to put extra comments into a patch in a series with
> > b4, at least last time I checked I don't think it was possible? But I
> > also thought the cover letter was exactly there for giving some
> > background of the series and documenting any dependencies on other
> > patches.
>
> I just put a '---' line and comments after that in the commit messages. 
> That works fine unless your git branch is going upstream directly (i.e. 
> via a pull request). Even when I apply my own patches, I get them from 
> lore and apply so the comments are dropped.

Ah, didn't know this was possible/supported. In the past with git
send-email directly I'd edit the patch file and add some text under the
"---" manually but wasn't aware you can put it directly in the commit
message. But I guess if it produces the same output either way it makes
sense.

I won't have a problem with pull requests since I'm just a normal patch
submitter ;)

Thanks for the advice!

Regards
Luca

>
> Rob