Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] selftests/mm fixes for arm64

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 12:01:45PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 19:49:13 +0100 Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 24/07/2023 17:38, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 09:25:14 +0100 Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > >> This is v3 of my series to clean up mm selftests so that they run correctly on
> > >> arm64. See [1] for full explanation.

> > > Please don't do that.  Please maintain the [0/n] description alongside the
> > > patchset and resend it each time you resend the series.

> > I previously thought that the cover letter was primarily for the email
> > recipients and the description on each patch was the part that went into git?
> > Clearly I'm wrong, but can't see anything in submitting-patches.rst so guess the
> > mm process is a bit different?

> I expect all subsystem maintainers would like the [0/N] intro to be
> maintained and resent as the patchset evolves.

Speaking for myself having everything directly in the e-mail makes the 
whole process easier, it means that everything that's needed is there
immediately without having to go locate some external information or
dredge things up from memory.  This is especially useful when whoever's
reading the series has poor connectivity for whatever reason (eg, I
often go through my patch backlog while on trains).

Cover letters that I get do also tend up to find their way into git in
some form, generally edited a bit, due to the way I CI incoming changes:

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git/commit/?h=for-6.6&id=85d12eda2382cd5b93eed720b5a08f39d42cfef4

though most people don't do anything like that.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature