From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.zytor.com (terminus.zytor.com [65.50.211.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9ED22095AE49 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2804:7f4:c480:f0c1::1] ([IPv6:2804:7f4:c480:f0c1:0:0:0:1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.zytor.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v7OHZSSs016966 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:35:31 -0700 To: Laszlo Ersek , edk2-devel@lists.01.org Cc: Jordan Justen , Andrew Fish , Michael D Kinney , Liming Gao , Star Zeng , Eric Dong , Mark Doran , Ruiyu Ni , hao.a.wu@intel.com References: <0aa39046-ef5f-af3b-9e25-fb269a286ad5@redhat.com> From: Paulo Alcantara Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:35:29 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0aa39046-ef5f-af3b-9e25-fb269a286ad5@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] read-only UDF file system support X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 17:35:16 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 24/08/2017 14:26, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > Hi Paulo, > > On 08/24/17 19:12, Paulo Alcantara wrote: > >> v3: >> - Install UDF partition child handles with a Vendor-Defined Media >> Device Path. >> - Changed UdfDxe to check for Vendor-Defined Media Device Paths with a >> specific UDF file system GUID when determining to whether or not >> start the driver. >> - Removed leading TAB chars in some source files identified by >> PatchCheck.py tool. > > If you don't change a given patch from v2 to v3, then please pick up the > Reviewed-by and similar tags that you receive for the patch during the > v2 review. That way we'll know that we don't have to re-review those > patches. > > I reckon you didn't change the OvmfPkg and ArmVirtPkg patches between v2 > and v3; is that right? No, I didn't. That was my fault -- forgot to add yours and Ard's R-b on those patches, sorry. I'll send a v4 of this series including them. > >> Repo: https://github.com/pcacjr/edk2.git >> Branch: udf-fs > > It's best to push all versions of a patch set to different (versioned) > branches, and once pushed, never to change them. It lets people fetch > all versions at any time, and rebase / compare them. Yes - I will do it next time. Thanks. Paulo