Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sat, 6 Feb 2021 11:18:12 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
Cc:     Zheng Yongjun <zhengyongjun3@huawei.com>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
        <linux-decnet-user@lists.sourceforge.net>,
        <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Return the correct errno code
Message-ID: <20210206111812.284f2bc0@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210204111426.00001bba@intel.com>
References: <20210204085630.19452-1-zhengyongjun3@huawei.com>
        <20210204111426.00001bba@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 11:14:26 -0800 Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
> Zheng Yongjun wrote:
> 
> > When kzalloc failed, should return ENOMEM rather than ENOBUFS.  
> 
> All these patches have the same subject and description, couldn't they
> just be part of a single series with a good cover letter?

Agreed. The patches seem to be lacking clear justification.
Cover letter would be good.

> I'm not saying make them a single patch, because that is bad for
> bisection, but having them as a single series means we review related
> changes at one time, and can comment on them as a group.