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;
From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To:     Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net, phil@philpotter.co.uk,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, straube.linux@gmail.com,
        Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] staging: r8188eu: add error handling of rtw_read16
Date:   Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:51:51 +0200
Message-ID: <10877752.rW0qT3HDr3@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <794dfd94-fe88-43ac-c4ec-9ff7df9db6de@gmail.com>
References: <cover.1629789580.git.paskripkin@gmail.com> <2227654.mbYB7oqmoa@localhost.localdomain> <794dfd94-fe88-43ac-c4ec-9ff7df9db6de@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 11:55:37 AM CEST Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> On 8/25/21 12:48 PM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 10:22:16 AM CEST Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> >> On 8/25/21 7:35 AM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> >> > Dear Pavel,
> >> > 
> >> > Please note that if and when my patch "Use usb_control_msg_recv / send () in
> >> > usbctrl_vendorreq ()" will be merged, "if (res! = len)" will always evaluate 'true'
> >> > and usb_read16 () will always return -EIO even if usbctrl_vendorreq () succeeds.
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> Yep, thank you, but it depends on which series will go in first :)
> >> 
> >> There is a chance, that you will need to clean up this part, if mine 
> >> will be merged before yours
> >> 
> > 
> > Ha-ha ... I know that beautiful rule: whoever breaks must fix!
> > However there should be another rule which says that
> > the old (me) takes precedence over the young (you) :-)
> > 
> 
> The main problem, that no one knows who is the "old". Greg can take 
> patches in any order he wants, because they are naturally independent :)
> 
> 
> We only can say smth like "this one depends on this one" as reply to 
> patch to inform Greg about the situation.
> 
> > Seriously, thank you so much for your help and the "Reviewed by"
> > tag on my work.
> > 
> 
> You too :) We are doing same job here for the good of community and 
> kernel itself
> 
Pavel, Dan,

Did you really take my "old" vs. "young" precedence rule seriously?

I was just kidding, ahead of thanking Pavel for his "Reviewed-by" tag
to my patch.

That statement deserved no comment. I thought it was
clear it was just a joke :)

Thanks,

Fabio
> 
> 
> With regards,
> Pavel Skripkin
>