On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 02:04:56PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 14-12-22, 09:21, Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 14.12.2022 06:19, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > This patchset adds toolstack support for I2C, GPIO and generic virtio > > > devices. > > > This is inspired from the work done by Oleksandr for the Disk device. > > > > > > This is developed as part of Linaro's Project Stratos, where we are > > > working > > > towards Hypervisor agnostic Rust based backends [1]. > > > > > > This is based of Xen's master branch. > > > > > > V9->V10: > > > - Swap I2C/GPIO compatible strings, they were wrongly added earlier. > > > - Arrange tags in timely order and add new ones. > > > > The affected patch surely needed all tags to be dropped which weren't > > explicitly indicated to remain valid across the bug fix. > > Hmm, since it was a very small change (only fixed the compatible > strings) I thought it would be okay to carry the tags and rather harsh > to the reviewers to drop them, since they invested a lot of time > reviewing these. Though I do get what you are suggesting here.
I would have carry over the tags as well in this case. If the tag were dropped, it wouldn't really have been an issue for me, it doesn't take much time to review a patch series that I've already reviewed. I usually look at a diff with the previous version (with `git range-diff`, patchew can help as well[1]), and my previous comment if needed. But dropping rvb tag of non-maintainer maybe more "harsh" as you says as they may not have time to re-apply their tags before patch gets committed. > Should I ask Oleksandr / Anthony to provide their tags for patch 1/3 > again ? My tag is still valid. Thanks. Cheers, [1] https://patchew.org/Xen/[email protected]/ Then look for "diff against: v9" -- Anthony PERARD
