From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>,
Robin Gong <b38343@freescale.com>,
<linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 18:35:42 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57583B4E.1080905@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160608075619.GF1521@katana>
Hi Wolfram,
On 08.06.2016 10:56, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
>> Changes from v2 to v3:
>
> This series was odd to review. I am used to that we build stuff on top
> of each other to strive for the best technical solution. I didn't expect
> that you like all of my changes, but at least some of them were obviously
> correct. But since even those were ignored, it really feels like a step
> backwards and thus, the reviewing time a bit wasted :(
>
> Stuff like 64-bit support and the softdog timer (so people can actually
> test the framework) is completely missing, too. Why not adding those?
> They are easy patches.
>
I don't object or ignore your work, I'm sorry if this series makes you
feel sad, I'll do all my best for you in v4. I'm sincerely happy that
I found one more independent user of the feature, and I appreciate your
done work and review comments, even downloading, applying and adjusting
the changes took your time, and because I'm pretty sure you don't have
much spare time I value it.
Quite many times when I sent long non-trivial series in the past they
were either deterrent for review and plainly ignored or expectedly
caused too many review comments at once, that's why here in the cover
letter I emphasized :
>> In comparison to v1 and v2 this version does not have quite many
>> important features, because now the goal is to initiate technical
>> review of the simplest possible core change, the fat tail is put
>> aside at the moment.
I hope I managed to collect enough review comments (if Guenter adds
a note to your/my comments to v3 4/6, that would be perfect), and I'll
add your new changes and my cut-off changes to v4 pile.
With best wishes,
Vladimir
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-08 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-07 17:38 [PATCH v3 0/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-07 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] watchdog: add set_pretimeout interface Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-07 20:32 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-06-08 6:34 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-08 12:58 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-09 21:12 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-07 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] watchdog: add WDIOC_SETPRETIMEOUT and WDIOC_GETPRETIMEOUT Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-07 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] watchdog: add pretimeout read-only device attribute to sysfs Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-08 6:57 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-07 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-07 21:43 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-06-08 13:37 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-08 13:53 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-06-08 15:11 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-08 15:38 ` kbuild: default n removals? (was: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework) Joe Perches
2016-06-08 18:05 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-06-15 10:02 ` kbuild: default n removals? Michal Marek
2016-06-08 6:54 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework Wolfram Sang
2016-06-08 14:08 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-08 18:20 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-06-09 21:22 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-09 21:14 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-07 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] watchdog: pretimeout: add panic pretimeout governor Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-08 7:08 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-08 14:28 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-09 21:23 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-07 17:38 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] watchdog: pretimeout: add noop " Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-08 7:10 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-08 14:32 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2016-06-08 7:56 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] watchdog: add watchdog pretimeout framework Wolfram Sang
2016-06-08 15:35 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy [this message]
2016-06-09 21:30 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-24 9:46 ` Wolfram Sang
2016-06-24 13:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2016-06-24 22:13 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=57583B4E.1080905@mentor.com \
--to=vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com \
--cc=b38343@freescale.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=wim@iguana.be \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).