Re: [PATCH v3 2/2 RESEND] checkpatch: warn on empty rust doc comments
Hridesh MG <[email protected]> Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:04:43 +0530
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-newbie,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.rust-for-linux |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CALiyAo=udy-P4ki1-_CAk7bHWfAjoioYEZ_ah+i6DJZ0MmmCQg@mail.gmail.com> |
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 8:11=E2=80=AFAM Patrick Miller <[email protected]= e> wrote: > After the latest revision of my patch [1], I split the if statement so th= at > there is a parent check for rust files for future rust patch checks. So, > this would perfectly fit within that block. > > Do you want me to add your code and credit you in my patch? > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20240914181618.837227-2-paddy= [email protected]/ Please disregard my prior email, I had failed to CC everyone. Since the change is small I'm okay with adding it as part of your patch, please do add the Co-developed-by tag, thanks! However, I was curious how conflicts like these are generally resolved. For example, if there are two large patchsets which conflict with each other, how does one ensure that they are compatible, and even if they are, how do the maintainers ensure that they are applied in the correct order?