[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ded0cce0-3462-4c40-96e5-ca53b2028767@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 14:54:20 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Cc: NĂcolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado@...labora.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, kernelci@...ts.linux.dev,
kernel@...labora.com, Tim Bird <Tim.Bird@...y.com>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/3] Add test to verify probe of devices from
discoverable busses
On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 10:45:59AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Life hack: Don't put RFC in the subject. Especially if it's a v2 or
> higher. No one reads RFC patches.
RFC does tend to be useful in cases where you know that there are
substantial problems with the patches but are posting to solicit
feedback of some kind - otherwise people will tend to get annoyed when
they notice the problems.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists