From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 3/3] knfsd: Modify write_ports to use svc_find_xprt service Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:25:12 -0400 Message-ID: <20071011152512.GB17468@fieldses.org> References: <20071011034608.GC6684@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: NeilBrown , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, Greg Banks To: Tom Tucker Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfzuT-0008Ut-Vs for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:25:14 -0700 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214] helo=fieldses.org) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1IfzuY-00015q-Sq for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:25:19 -0700 In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 12:11:26AM -0500, Tom Tucker wrote: > What's the most efficient way for you to accept fixes/changes? I've been > going incremental because it's easy on me :-). Is this the best option for > you? Well, the problem is that there's two different histories we want, and no tool really makes it easy (or perhaps can make it really easy) to track them both: - There's the final cleaned-up series that we want submitted. - There's the incremental changes that are made to fix problems in the original series. A lot of people deal with this by just resubmitting the whole thing (usually as a big mailbomb each time) with a changelog in the 0/n message that explains what changed since the previous submission. But in practice I think that means we lose some follow-up review because it's harder for reviewers in the previous round to plow through the whole series from the start each time. And it looks like Greg is still spotting some problems that might not have been otherwise. So that's working. So for now I guess I'll try what seems to be Andrew's approach--take incremental patches, then merge them in before the end. If that turns out to be too hard, I'll complain. > Regarding patch #6, I think the svc_find_xprt API _may_ be ok, but the > implementation was bogus (sorry). I _think_ the implementation is fixed in > the latest incremental. Greg can confirm. OK! --b. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs