On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 21:47 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Doug Ledford wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 07:35 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > >> >> I pulled that via a bundle from patchworks. I'll double check it. > >> > Did you check it out? fixed it out? > >> > >> I took a look now, you've rebased to-be-rebased/for-4.2 to 4.1-rc4 and > > > > Correct. > > > >> it seems this is what you are going to push into the kernel.org treem > > > > Correct. > > > >> but this series is still there with the zillion tested/reviewed/etc > >> signature per one 2-3 patch, I think we've agreed this needs to be > >> addressed prior to the upstream push, right? > > > > Incorrect. What you objected to before was the large Cc: list in the > > patches. That is gone. What is there now is just the reviewed-by: list > > of three people, and the tested-by list of two people. As the entire > > patch set as a whole was reviewed and tested by those people, it seems > > accurate to me. > > Doug, I have never ever seen a patch set (specifically the 15~23 part > of it) with that level of simplicity That portion of the patchset didn't start out with that level of simplicity per patch, it evolved to that because it made review *significantly* easier. It's very simple to review a patch that does: Add 1 helper Replace tests in code with just that 1 helper because you can scroll through that patch and know that every line being replaced is related to that one helper. If you want to know every line that was replaced with rdma_cap_iw_cm, you go to that one patch and it's all listed very easy to read. On the other hand, when you squash all those patches together, review becomes much harder because if you want to see what a single helper does, you have to sift through all of the other helper changes and hope you find the right ones, and that you found all of the right ones. > and > signature/reviewers/tested-by/etc inflation. I added those myself as part of an automated addition. It applied to the entire series, so it was put on each patch. The people that tested/reviewed the series did not do so to individual patches, they hit all of them. And as was pointed out a couple of weeks ago on an earlier patchset I picked up, it is generally good behavior to give attribution where it is due to encourage people to participate. -- Doug Ledford GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD