DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 7CA9F60314
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To:     Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Cc:     Tony Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
        Pkshih <pkshih@realtek.com>, Andy Huang <tehuang@realtek.com>,
        "sgruszka\@redhat.com" <sgruszka@redhat.com>,
        "linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] rtw88: mac80211 driver for Realtek 802.11ac wireless network chips
References: <1548654407-28469-1-git-send-email-yhchuang@realtek.com>
        <043aedf4-0ed4-e128-3cd2-242aaef128f6@lwfinger.net>
        <F7CD281DE3E379468C6D07993EA72F84D1794AAB@RTITMBSVM04.realtek.com.tw>
        <CA+ASDXM=+_U+SrXhm3pq4Zd7gkvHwkRAZw+OGmzg=6+0+=iZGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 29 Jan 2019 09:53:58 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CA+ASDXM=+_U+SrXhm3pq4Zd7gkvHwkRAZw+OGmzg=6+0+=iZGg@mail.gmail.com>
        (Brian Norris's message of "Mon, 28 Jan 2019 18:41:06 -0800")
Message-ID: <87pnsfucfd.fsf@purkki.adurom.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> writes:

> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:15 PM Tony Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com> wrote:
>> This NULL pointer was found months ago and has been fixed already.
>> Thanks for your test :).
>> I am holding the patch to fix it for the next patchsets.
>>
>> BTW, since rtw88 has not been accepted, could I send next patch set based on
>> this patch set as long as I explicitly mark that the next patch is based on the previous one?
>
> I'd normally expect that if you find major bugs in your initial driver
> submission that still isn't reviewed/merged, you might as well just
> roll the fix into latest version and describe it in the
> cover-letter/changelog. This particular change is so trivial it
> doesn't really seem to deserve a separate patch.
>
> (It would also help people like me, who may very well run into the
> same bug when they get around to testing/reviewing the driver.)
>
> I also don't know what the contents of the "next patch set" is -- if
> it's a lot of new features, maybe they don't deserve to clutter the
> initial submission, but if they're bugfixes like this, it seems like
> you could just fix the original patch set.

This is what I suggest as well. Don't add new features or any other
large changes while the driver is under review, instead keep them in a
separate branch etc. But bugfixes are ok.

-- 
Kalle Valo