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:   Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:07:42 -0400
From:   Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v3 2/3] dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to
 put_unlocked_entry()
Message-ID: <20210422200742.GG1627633@redhat.com>
References: <20210419213636.1514816-1-vgoyal@redhat.com>
 <20210419213636.1514816-3-vgoyal@redhat.com>
 <20210420093420.2eed3939@bahia.lan>
 <20210420140033.GA1529659@redhat.com>
 <CAPcyv4g2raipYhivwbiSvsHmSdgLO8wphh5dhY3hpjwko9G4Hw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210422062458.GA4176641@infradead.org>
 <CAPcyv4h42yPKmWByBVkjgL_0LjBg3ZNYKLBJKgjixsdTzOpaiA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4h42yPKmWByBVkjgL_0LjBg3ZNYKLBJKgjixsdTzOpaiA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:01:15PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:25 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:09:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > Can you get in the habit of not replying inline with new patches like
> > > this? Collect the review feedback, take a pause, and resend the full
> > > series so tooling like b4 and patchwork can track when a new posting
> > > supersedes a previous one. As is, this inline style inflicts manual
> > > effort on the maintainer.
> >
> > Honestly I don't mind it at all.  If you shiny new tooling can't handle
> > it maybe you should fix your shiny new tooling instead of changing
> > everyones workflow?
> 
> I think asking a submitter to resend a series is par for the course,
> especially for poor saps like me burdened by corporate email systems.
> Vivek, if this is too onerous a request just give me a heads up and
> I'll manually pull out the patch content from your replies.

I am fine with posting new version. Initially I thought that there
were only 1-2 minor cleanup comments so I posted inline, thinking
it might preferred method instead of posting full patch series again.

But then more comments came along. So posting another version makes
more sense now.

Thanks
Vivek