Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752992AbbDQIAP (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2015 04:00:15 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com ([209.85.212.181]:37284 "EHLO mail-wi0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750951AbbDQIAI (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Apr 2015 04:00:08 -0400 Message-ID: <5530BD84.4020304@profitbricks.com> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 10:00:04 +0200 From: Michael Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jason Gunthorpe CC: Roland Dreier , Sean Hefty , Hal Rosenstock , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tom Tucker , Steve Wise , Hoang-Nam Nguyen , Christoph Raisch , Mike Marciniszyn , Eli Cohen , Faisal Latif , Jack Morgenstein , Or Gerlitz , Haggai Eran , Ira Weiny , Tom Talpey , Doug Ledford Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 27/28] IB/Verbs: Clean up rdma_ib_or_iboe() References: <552BB470.4090407@profitbricks.com> <552BB85D.7010400@profitbricks.com> <20150413203350.GA20611@obsidianresearch.com> <552CDA1F.4050609@profitbricks.com> <20150416164311.GB22946@obsidianresearch.com> In-Reply-To: <20150416164311.GB22946@obsidianresearch.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1960 Lines: 53 On 04/16/2015 06:43 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 11:13:03AM +0200, Michael Wang wrote: > >>> I would be very happy to see a patch that adds cap_ib_smi to the >>> current tree and states 'This patch is tested to have no change on the >>> binary compilation results' >> >> There are too much reform there (per-dev to per-port), I guess the binary >> will changed more or less anyway... > > I think this patch series is huge, and everytime someone new looks at > it small functional errors seem to pop up.. This is a big changing after all :-P As Doug suggested at very beginning, all these changing are necessary in order to eliminate the usage of old inferring method, then we will have a clean stage for next reform. And since it's big, I tried to classified them according to logical, to help us review more easily, I'm not sure but compress the series may increasing the difficulty of reviewing... > > Doing something to reduce the review surface would be really helpful > here. Not changing the same line twice, using tools too perform these > transforms and then assert the patch is a NOP because .. tools. Some > other idea? Actually the main reform work finished in 1#~15#, the rest are just introducing cap_XX which we only need to check the description and usage, thus I'd like to suggest we focus on reviewing 1#~15#, after all, the rest won't introducing Bug and we can edit them at any time :-P Frankly speaking I think it's a good thing that we locate errors at this moment, whenever someone find issues, that means the patch has been reviewed thoroughly, I think may be just few more version, this series will become stable ;-) Regards, Michael Wang > > Jason > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/