Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1430739 > unrolled thread
| Started by | David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-24 17:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-06-29 14:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen-pciback: clean up {bar,rom}_init() David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com> - 2016-06-24 17:10 +0200
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen-pciback: clean up {bar,rom}_init() "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2016-06-27 09:30 +0200
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen-pciback: clean up {bar, rom}_init() David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com> - 2016-06-29 14:50 +0200
| From | David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 17:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen-pciback: clean up {bar,rom}_init() |
| Message-ID | <rNAU1-1d8-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On 07/06/16 07:31, Jan Beulich wrote: > - drop unused function parameter of read_dev_bar() > - drop rom_init() (now identical to bar_init()) > - fold read_dev_bar() into its now single caller > - simplify determination of 64-bit memory resource > - use const and unsigned Please split this in 5 separate patches for easier review. Especially as often anyone writing "simplify" means "accidentally break". David
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-27 09:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen-pciback: clean up {bar,rom}_init() |
| Message-ID | <rOz9v-5zv-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1430739 |
>>> On 24.06.16 at 17:01, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote: > On 07/06/16 07:31, Jan Beulich wrote: >> - drop unused function parameter of read_dev_bar() >> - drop rom_init() (now identical to bar_init()) >> - fold read_dev_bar() into its now single caller >> - simplify determination of 64-bit memory resource >> - use const and unsigned > > Please split this in 5 separate patches for easier review. > > Especially as often anyone writing "simplify" means "accidentally break". So this is directly opposite of what Boris had asked for - originally there were two patches, which I folded upon his request (and which he gave his R-b for already). May I ask the two of you to first settle on a consistent set of expectations to patches like this? Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-29 14:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen-pciback: clean up {bar, rom}_init() |
| Message-ID | <rPn6h-4ei-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1431772 |
On 27/06/16 08:24, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 24.06.16 at 17:01, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote: >> On 07/06/16 07:31, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> - drop unused function parameter of read_dev_bar() >>> - drop rom_init() (now identical to bar_init()) >>> - fold read_dev_bar() into its now single caller >>> - simplify determination of 64-bit memory resource >>> - use const and unsigned >> >> Please split this in 5 separate patches for easier review. >> >> Especially as often anyone writing "simplify" means "accidentally break". > > So this is directly opposite of what Boris had asked for - originally > there were two patches, which I folded upon his request (and > which he gave his R-b for already). May I ask the two of you to > first settle on a consistent set of expectations to patches like this? SubmittingPatches section 3 is clear on what is required. If your commit message is a list of bullet points it's a pretty big hint that none of the changes are related. David
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web