From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752858AbcDASyu (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2016 14:54:50 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0058.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.58]:48120 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751035AbcDASyt (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2016 14:54:49 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:968:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1540:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2559:2562:2693:2736:2828:2915:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3867:3868:3872:3873:3874:4250:4321:5007:6119:6120:7903:10004:10400:10848:11026:11232:11658:11914:12295:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:13439:13894:14659:21080:21324:30012:30054:30064:30069:30070:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:3,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: ant38_8116d734e1639 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1912 Message-ID: <1459536858.1744.30.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] staging: lustre: detypedef From: Joe Perches To: "Simmons, James A." , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Cc: Oleg Drokin , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" , "lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org" Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2016 11:54:18 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 15:58 +0000, Simmons, James A. wrote: > > When would be an appropriate time to submit patches similar to > > below that individually remove various typedefs from lustre code? > > > > These are pretty trivial to produce and verify so there's no > > particular hurry to do them now but applying them will require > > resync points for active and actually useful developers. > Actually could you hold off for the LNet core and LND drivers these > changes. I have plans to push a few more LNet patches soon. I have > been just waiting for everyone to figure out how to deal with the  > latest changes to the infinband layer first. Sure.  No worries. > There are a few typedefs like lnet_nid_t I like to keep or if it has to > be changed turn it into a struct then. Things like lnet_nid_t act like > a cookie handle. Fine by me. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2016 11:54:18 -0700 Subject: [lustre-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] staging: lustre: detypedef In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1459536858.1744.30.camel@perches.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Simmons, James A." , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Cc: Oleg Drokin , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" , "lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org" On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 15:58 +0000, Simmons, James A. wrote: > > When would be an appropriate time to submit patches similar to > > below that individually remove various typedefs from lustre code? > > > > These are pretty trivial to produce and verify so there's no > > particular hurry to do them now but applying them will require > > resync points for active and actually useful developers. > Actually could you hold off for the LNet core and LND drivers these > changes. I have plans to push a few more LNet patches soon. I have > been just waiting for everyone to figure out how to deal with the? > latest changes to the infinband layer first. Sure. ?No worries. > There are a few typedefs like lnet_nid_t I like to keep or if it has to > be changed turn it into a struct then. Things like lnet_nid_t act like > a cookie handle. Fine by me.