Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 18 Aug 2022 12:28:03 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@seco.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Camelia Groza <camelia.groza@nxp.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Madalin Bucur <madalin.bucur@nxp.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Li Yang <leoyang.li@nxp.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH net-next v4 00/25] net: dpaa: Cleanups in
 preparation for phylink conversion
Message-ID: <20220818122803.21f7294d@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <583c7997-fb01-63ad-775e-b6a8a8e93566@seco.com>
References: <20220818161649.2058728-1-sean.anderson@seco.com>
        <20220818112054.29cd77fb@kernel.org>
        <f085609c-24c9-a9fb-e714-18ba7f3ef48a@seco.com>
        <20220818115815.72809e33@kernel.org>
        <583c7997-fb01-63ad-775e-b6a8a8e93566@seco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:14:04 -0400 Sean Anderson wrote:
> > Ack, no question. I'm trying to tell you got to actually get stuff in.
> > It's the first week after the merge window and people are dumping code
> > the had written over the dead time on the list, while some reviewers
> > and maintainers are still on their summer vacation. So being
> > considerate is even more important than normally.  
> 
> OK, so perhaps a nice place to split the series is after patch 11. If
> you would like to review/apply a set of <15 patches, that is the place
> to break things. I can of course resend again with just those, if that's
> what I need to do to get these applied.

Mm, okay, let's give folks the customary 24h to object, otherwise I'll
pull in the first 11 tomorrow.

> That said, I specifically broke this series up into many small patches
> to make it easier to review. Each patch does exactly one thing. Had I
> known about these limits based on patch size, I would have just squashed
> everything into 15 patches. I think an arbitrary limit such as this has
> a perverse incentive.

Practically speaking I think it works out fairly nicely, IDK.
There's trade offs like always. Takes a bit of getting used to.