From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 0/3] Add cross-channel support Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 12:41:21 +0200 Message-ID: <567BCBD1.708@mellanox.com> References: <1450606571-15877-1-git-send-email-leon@leon.nu> <567BA695.8050403@mellanox.com> <20151224100001.GA21387@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151224100001.GA21387-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Leon Romanovsky , dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Leon Romanovsky List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 12/24/2015 12:00 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 10:02:29AM +0200, Or Gerlitz wrote: >> We had consensus among the reviewers that the 1st patch ("IB/core: Align >> coding style of ib_device_cap_flags structure") is wrong cleanup which >> basically is (1) unneeded (2) creates more damage (git blame and such, >> non-applicable to uapi, more) than benefit, etc -- finally Leon was >> convinced too [1]. > It's not really an issue vs uapi. Using the the wierd BIT() macro > would have been, but without it I think this cleanup is ok, even if I > personally wouldn't have done it. git-blame isn't really a major > issue either, as you can blame past revisions. I would personally wouldn't done cleanup either and I managed to convinced Leon to drop it, so we had concensus among the developers, the maintainer didn't have other opinion and he took the wrong step -- so we're asking to fix, that's all. > >> Leon will re-spin in the coming 1-2 hours V2, could please pick it instead >> of V1, when people agree on direction X and you are not against it, lets do >> X and not Y. > It would be great if we could stop rebasing whats already in the tree > for the benefit of everyone building on top of this. For example just > finished rebasing my series to move many constants includin this one > to the uapi headers, and I'd hate to rebase it once again now that > the dust has settled. The root issue here is that nothing was picked before 4.4-rc6, so we're in a situation where rebases are needed in the own-maintainer tree (github) to make things right. No way to avoid that. We should aim that for 4.6 and onward, code for -next will start getting in around rc1-2 and then things will be more robust, etc Or. Or. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html