On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 04:56:49PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > Sorry for that, I just ran scripts/get_maintainer.pl to get expert's > name and added them into each patch. The reason this change is made is > in patch 3/3. Test robot reported a code bug on the latest kernel, will > repost and CC everyone in all patches. > > > Rob Herring asked the same question in v2, I explained to him. The > discussion can be found here: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/10/484
... and when I open that link, the first paragraph says: "This is the explanation I made when Andrew helped to review the v1 post: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/23/78"; Do you see the absurdity of the link chasing of your explanation?! Instead, the explanation *WHY* should be in the commit message of the patch - not in mail replies when people ask you about it. Also, do not use lkml.org when referencing a mail on lkml but use the Message-ID of the header. We have a proper redirector at https://lkml.kernel.org/r/<Message-ID> Now lemme read the reason finally... "We need unify these two interfaces on behaviour since they are the same on essense from the users' point of view... " That's not a good enough reason for me to cause code churn. If the only reason is: because the one does it top-down and the other bottom-up, I'm not convinced. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) --
