linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: sdhci-pci: Use ACPI to set max frequency of sdio host

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2016 18:30:57 +0100
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:     Zach Brown <zach.brown@...com>
Cc:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: sdhci-pci: Use ACPI to set max frequency of sdio host

On 22 November 2016 at 17:37, Zach Brown <zach.brown@...com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 09:27:29AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>
>> Please try to not forget to bump the version number and to provide a
>> history of the what changes between revisions. It makes life easier
>> when reviewing and when I am about to apply patches.
>>
>
> Sorry, I'll make sure to include a history.
> When switching from RFC to PATCH should the version number of the PATCH
> be 1 or the lastest RFC version plus 1? Or does it not matter either way

RFC + 1, that would be best. Although it doesn't matter that much.

> as long as the history is present?

Yes, this is the most important part.

Kind regards
Uffe