Message-ID: <05eed3d8321d0f355bf3dc59ffea3d6ab08135fa.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: FlashPoint: Replace arithmetic addition by
 bitwise OR
From:   James Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>
Reply-To: jejb@linux.ibm.com
To:     Deepak R Varma <drv@mailo.com>
Cc:     Khalid Aziz <khalid@gonehiking.org>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Saurabh Singh Sengar <ssengar@microsoft.com>,
        Praveen Kumar <kumarpraveen@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Tue, 07 Feb 2023 22:25:09 +0300
In-Reply-To: <Y+KOeP0OOiem3lR5@ubun2204.myguest.virtualbox.org>
References: <Y+I0HXsHezZRtFOM@ubun2204.myguest.virtualbox.org>
         <9a78cdd254d5d962450242d2e01c3a0f702a63a0.camel@linux.ibm.com>
         <Y+KOeP0OOiem3lR5@ubun2204.myguest.virtualbox.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.4 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2023-02-07 at 23:16 +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote:
[...]
> James, there are a few other patch submissions for the scsi subsystem
> that I submitted in last few weeks. I sent couple of reminder request
> for comments on those submission, but still waiting. Could you please
> also review those and share your feedback?

The problem is basically that they don't fix a bug or introduce an
enhancement.  Review bandwidth in SCSI is the main limiting factor for
any new patch, so we tend to concentrate on these two types.  The main
problem with code replacement patches is that they do tend to introduce
inadvertent bugs in old drivers, which is why people are afraid to
review them.  You can reduce the overhead of review by demonstrating
that the binary produced is unchanged (obviously this works for some
but not all of your patches), so a maintainer need only decide if they
like the change rather than worrying about it introducing a regression.

Regards,

James