[PATCH net] net: dsa: mt7530: don't change PVC_EG_TAG when CPU port becomes VLAN-aware
Vladimir Oltean
vladimir.oltean at nxp.com
Wed Feb 8 12:14:07 PST 2023
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 07:07:14PM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-02-07 at 14:39 +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 11:56:13AM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > > Thank you Vladimir for the quick turn-around!
> > >
> > > For future case, please avoid replying with new patches - tag area
> > > included - to existing patch/thread, as it confuses tag propagation,
> > > thanks!
> >
> > Ah, yes, I see (and thanks for fixing it up).
> >
> > Although I need to ask, since I think I made legitimate use of the tools
> > given to me. What should I have done instead? Post an RFC patch (even
> > though I didn't know whether it worked or not) in a thread separate to
> > the debugging session? I didn't want to diverge from the thread reporting
> > the issue. Maybe we should have started a new thread, decoupled from the
> > patch?
>
> Here what specifically confused the bot were the additional tags
> present in the debug patch. One possible alternative would have been
> posting - in the same thread - the code of the tentative patch without
> the formal commit message/tag area.
>
> That option is quite convenient toome, as writing the changelog takes
> me a measurable amount of time and I could spend that effort only when
> the patch is finalize/tested.
>
> Please let me know if the above makes sense to you.
I think even the Signed-off-by would confuse the patchwork bot, right?
I would have to send just the diff portion, and send the full patch as
an email attachment.
In any case, I'll pay attention to this next time.
More information about the Linux-mediatek
mailing list