Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:16:14 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Roland Dreier <rolandd@cisco.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openib-general@openib.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13]  [RFC] IB: PathScale InfiniPath driver
Message-ID: <20051217131614.GB13043@infradead.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Roland Dreier <rolandd@cisco.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	openib-general@openib.org
References: <20051031150618.627779f1.akpm@osdl.org> <200512161548.jRuyTS0HPMLd7V81@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200512161548.jRuyTS0HPMLd7V81@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1012
Lines: 19

On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 03:48:54PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
> having sysctls that set values also settable through module parameters
> under /sys/module, code inside #ifndef __KERNEL__ so include files can
> be shared with other PathScale code, code in ipath_i2c.c that might be
> simplified by using drivers/i2c, etc.  I'd like to try to get a sense
> of whether I'm being too picky or whether PathScale really does need
> to fix these up before the driver is merged.

Yes, please fix this stuff before.  The current driver looks like a horrible
mess.

Is there some political plot going where pathscale folks are forcing you to
send this out in this scheme?  Otherwise I couldn't explain the code quality
magnitudes lower than normally expected from your merges.
-
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/