linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] iio: accel: sca3000: simplify by using newer infrastructure

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

Message-ID: <aGlsj1m4TygpRkjt@surfacebook.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2025 21:18:55 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Andrew Ijano <andrew.ijano@...il.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, jic23@...nel.org,
	andrew.lopes@...mni.usp.br, gustavobastos@....br,
	dlechner@...libre.com, nuno.sa@...log.com, andy@...nel.org,
	jstephan@...libre.com, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] iio: accel: sca3000: simplify by using newer
 infrastructure

Sat, Jul 05, 2025 at 12:03:37AM -0300, Andrew Ijano kirjoitti:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 12:23 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 03:20:06PM -0300, Andrew Ijano wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:41 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 09:24:19AM -0300, Andrew Ijano wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:56 AM Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 6:17 AM Andrew Ijano <andrew.ijano@...il.com> wrote:

...

> > > > > > I haven't found any reference to a base commit here. Have you
> > > > > > forgotten to use --base when preparing the series?
> > > > > > In any case, please clarify what this series is based on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for pointing this out! I think I forgot to use --base for
> > > > > it. In this case, should I submit a new version of the whole patchset
> > > > > with this information or is there a better way to do it?
> > > >
> > > > For now just reply here what is the base. I asked this question above.
> > >
> > > Ok! No problem. So the base for this patchset is the commit
> > > 3c23416f69f2870bea83697d7ab03c6a8497daa7.
> >
> > No such commit in the repository. :-(
> > You are doing something interesting here [1].
> >
> > So, make sure you are based on the iio/testing or so, make sure that the base
> > commit is the one that may be found on git.kernel.org. Use that in the next
> > version. Due to above this version is ambiguous to even start reviewing it.
> >
> > [1] I have connected IIO subsystem as a remote, so I have access to many trees
> > from kernel.org (but not to all of them).
> 
> Actually, I think I didn't fully understand this part of the
> contribution process and that's what was causing confusion.
> Basically, the base commit appeared in the previous version of this
> patchset but I removed it after it was approved, to prevent it from
> being reviewed again. However, I think I could just add the
> reviewed-by tag.
> 
> I'll send a next version with other corrections and the missing commit
> based on iio/testing.

What you just described is a normal process of rebasing your local tree against
the (updated) upstream branch (in this case we are taling about iio/testing or
iio/togreg whichever suits better). Hence, if the commit was approved, the new
base should be provided. Under "approved" means that it made the subsystem tree
and pending for the upstream.


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko