From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S935158AbdBQVz6 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:55:58 -0500
Received: from mail.savoirfairelinux.com ([208.88.110.44]:54762 "EHLO
        mail.savoirfairelinux.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S935109AbdBQVzz (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:55:55 -0500
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel@savoirfairelinux.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/6] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: move ATU code in its own file
In-Reply-To: <20170217213518.GH6096@lunn.ch>
References: <20170217150531.2181-1-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <20170217150531.2181-3-vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com> <20170217213518.GH6096@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:54:50 -0500
Message-ID: <87fujcmqj9.fsf@weeman.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Andrew,

Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> writes:

> This seems to be more than renaming a few functions. There looks to be
> real changes here. I think these changes should be split out into a
> separate patch with an explanation what is being changed. Keep this
> patch for plain renames.
>
> It would also be easier to review if the patch just moved the code, no
> changes. Then have patches which clean up the API. It is hard to see
> what is move and what is cleanup. Plain move needs little review,
> cleanup needs more review. With the current patch, it is hard to see
> which is which.

I understand your concerns about that. I've started that way (just
moving code) but this ended up messier because of the naming convention
which would required renaming and more diffstats. I found it actually
easier to review the new code at once by reading all the addition block.

Note that we are very close from 4.10, so unless there is a major issue
in the patchset, I'd prefer not to respin new versions. I'd gladly send
cosmetics fixup later though. I'm waiting for this patchset to land in
net-next to send the second one ready for cross-chip bridging in DSA.

Thanks,

        Vivien