On 15.11.2023 13:39, Oleksii wrote: > On Wed, 2023-11-15 at 10:56 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 10.11.2023 17:30, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: >>> <asm/random.h> is common for Arm, PPC and RISC-V thereby it >>> is moved to asm-generic. >> >> When you say "moved", ... >> >>> Signed-off-by: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kuroc...@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> Changes in V2: >>> - update the commit messages >>> --- >>> xen/include/asm-generic/random.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 xen/include/asm-generic/random.h >> >> ... you also want to actually move things. > Sure, I'll delete Arm and PPC's random.h in the next patch series > version. > >> >> Since the above comment matches ones on earlier patches, yet otoh in >> your >> submissions of two individual patches you mentioned you sent them >> separately because this series wasn't fully reviewed yet, would you >> mind >> clarifying whether further going through this version of the series >> is >> actually going to be a good use of time? > I think it still makes sense to review this series. > > I probably have to stop sending patches from this series separately. I > thought merging almost-ready patches would be a little faster if they > moved outside the patch series. > > If it is possible to merge approved patches separately without getting > approved for the whole patch series,
We do this quite frequently, as long as it's clear that later patches in a series (which are approved and hence can go in) don't depend on earlier ones. Ones at the beginning of a series can go individually anyway; the only time that I can think of right away where this would not be desirable is if they introduced then-dead code. Jan > then what I did before doesn't > make sense, and I am sorry for this inconvenience. > > I can return the patches I sent separately to this patch series. > > ~ Oleksii >
