I can definitely clean up the issues you (and others) have raised, and will work on breaking up the larger changes into smaller, topic-based sets as well. I could use some instruction on how to proceed, though...
I presume in this case I should've flagged this series as an RFC, and started to advertise a merge-able patch when most of the feedback was resolved (and not added additional cleanups to the series already under review). What do I do with the cleanups in the present case - re-label them as an RFC, repost all patches for comment (including the things added in what I've labelled v4), and send a final patch series when all comments are resolved? Or break them up into the previous PATCH v3 set, which had no comments, plus a second series tagged RFC (at least until I've got a sense of appropriate cleanup and granularity)?
Also, in the future, at what point is it safe to assume a set of patches will be merged? And how do I indicate dependencies between series of patches? This last is fairly important to me, given the overlaps with some of James' work; we're beginning to coordinate via email, but I'd like to find out the general expectation here (and hopefully avoid this sort of faux pas going forward).
Many thanks for your continued feedback and advice, Dan.