Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Simplify masking conditions and remove redundant work

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 18:29 +0800, Zhuo Song wrote:

Please try and number your postings on a given subject in some sort of
consistent way. Right now my queue folder contains from you:

Subject:        [PATCH] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Remove the condition for masking NX in 
vendor specific functions
Date:           Sat, 6 Sep 2014 01:55:22 +0800 (05/09/14 18:55:22)

Subject:        [PATCH] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Remove the condition for masking NX in 
vendor specific functions
Date:           Sat, 6 Sep 2014 02:01:21 +0800 (05/09/14 19:01:21)

Subject:        [PATCH] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Simplify masking conditions and remove 
redundant work
Date:           Mon, 8 Sep 2014 20:02:27 +0800 (08/09/14 13:02:27)

Subject:        [PATCH] xc_cpuid_x86.c: No need to mask NX twice
Date:           Fri, 5 Sep 2014 18:11:33 +0800 (05/09/14 11:11:33)

Subject:        [PATCH v2 resend 2/2] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Remove limit for RDTSCP
Date:           Tue, 9 Sep 2014 15:55:49 +0800 (09/09/14 08:55:49)

Subject:        [PATCH v2 1/2] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Simplify masking conditions and 
remove redundant work
Date:           Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:31:51 +0800 (09/09/14 05:31:51)

Subject:        [PATCH v3 1/3] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Simplify masking conditions and 
remove redundant work
Date:           Wed, 10 Sep 2014 10:29:24 +0800 (10/09/14 03:29:24)

Subject:        [PATCH v2] xc_cpuid_x86.c: Simplify masking conditions and 
remove redundant work
Date:           Wed, 10 Sep 2014 18:29:00 +0800 (10/09/14 11:29:00)

Which I think are all different iterations of the same thing, but it is
very hard for me to figure out what is going on with all of these
patches flying around with different versions and titles etc, especially
when the version numbers appear to be going backwards in some postings.

In future when you resend a patch then please increment the version,
even if you have given it a different subject/title. Don't start again
from v1, and certainly never decrement it as you appear to have done in
the latest posting. If necessary use a 0/N series introduction with a
consistent title to explain the general purpose of the series (which
should hopefully be immune to renaming as the patch is reviewed).

And please use the intra-patch changelog (which should be after the
"---" explaining what changed in this posting since last time, see [0])
to indicate if something is a renamed version of some previous patch, as
well as what has changed.

So, to get back on track please can you let me know which of the above
is the latest thing which I should actually pay attention to.

Ian.

[0]
http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Submitting_Xen_Patches#Review.2C_Rinse_.26_Repeat


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel