Re: [PATCH v7 16/24] i2c: allow adapter drivers to override the adapter locking

A question on best practices here... I already did a v8 (but only as
a branch) so I think this will be v9, bit that's a minor detail. The
real question is what I should do about patches 1-15 that are already
in next? Send them too? If not, should I send 16-24 with the same old
patch numbers or should they be numbered 1-9 now? And should such a
shortened series be rebased on 1-15 in next?

Or does it not really matter?

Easiest for me is:

Send as v9, only the patches not yet applied, numbered from 1-9, based
on my for-next.