[PATCH] rs6000: Remove unnecessary option manipulation.

Segher Boessenkool segher@kernel.crashing.org
Thu Nov 4 11:38:57 GMT 2021

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 04:43:40PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 10/19/21 16:23, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 05:24:32PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> >>On 10/14/21 17:10, Bill Schmidt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> >>>Looks like you got your parentheses wrong here.
> >>
> >>Whoops, thanks for the heads up.
> >>
> >>I'm testing this fixed version.
> >
> >Please start a new thread for every new patch (series).  I missed this
> >one like this, instead I reviewed the older one.
> Is it really best practice. My impression is that patch review (iterating 
> over
> a patch) happens in the same thread (in most cases). It's caused by 
> discussion
> in between sender reviewers.

Yes, it is best practice.  It is impossible to juggle multiple versions
of a patch at once and not have some fall on the floor.

> >[-- Attachment #2: 
> >0001-rs6000-Remove-unnecessary-option-manipulation.patch --]
> >[-- Type: text/x-patch, Encoding: base64, Size: 2.6K --]
> Meh :) If I need a reply to somebody's questions, I always attach patch as 
> an attachment.
> And I can't likely influence how Thunderbird is going to mark it.

You should not use base64.  This is documented.  Patches in the archive
will not show up either that way.

> Anyway, sending updated version of the patch.

Not in a reply please.  If nothing else, this makes it hard for other
people to apply your patches (to test them out, or to actually commit
them upstream).


More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list