[PATCH v5 0/9] Reorganize R8A7779/Marzen USB code

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 01:55:12AM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
> 
>    Here's the set of 9 patches against the Simon Horman's 'renesas.git' repo,
> 'renesas-next-20130419' tag.  It was created to fix the shortcomings in the
> R8A7779/Marzen USB platform code and R8A7779 USB common PHY driver, and so
> spans both arch/arm/mach-shmobile/ and drivers/usb/ subtrees (some patches have
> to touch both subtrees). The patches were conceived with the complete
> bisectability goal in mind.
> 
> [1/9] ARM: shmobile: Marzen: move USB EHCI, OHCI, and PHY devices to R8A7779 code
> [2/9] ehci-platform: add pre_setup() method to platform data
> [3/9] ARM: shmobile: r8a7779: setup EHCI internal buffer
> [4/9] rcar-phy: remove EHCI internal buffer setup
> [5/9] ARM: shmobile: r8a7779: remove USB PHY 2nd memory resource
> [6/9] rcar-phy: correct base address
> [7/9] rcar-phy: add platform data
> [8/9] ARM: shmobile: Marzen: pass platform data to USB PHY device
> [9/9] rcar-phy: handle platform data

Please can you rethink how you use get_maintainers.pl and send out
patches?

Sending them "To" everyone who get_maintainers.pl spits out is all well
and good, but it means that there's no discrimination between those who
have a primary interest in the patches and those who don't.

Examples of people with a primary interest: those maintaining the
platforms and/or those who you want to merge your patches.  These
should be on the To: line.

Those who don't: everyone else who may have an interest - these go on
the Cc: line.

You're about the only person I regularly get patches for platforms which
are sent To: me all the time, and really they are not "important" for
me (though they are important enough for me to be Cc'd).

What I'm saying is that having come back from a vacation last Tuesday,
I could not just scan through this mailbox for all messages marked "To"
me and treat those as being more important than everything else, because
soo many of yours were captured by that.  And I'm still tacking the
backlog today, almost a week later.

Please be more considerate to those who you're mailing.

(Also, make sure you don't honor the Mail-Followup-To: header, which
will lead your mailer to keep placing all recipients into the To:
header on reply - because it breaks the above reasoning.  The To:
header should be those recipients who you are directly discussing, and
Cc: is for "interested side parties".)

Thanks.