From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751860AbaEBJvv (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 May 2014 05:51:51 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175]:42473 "EHLO mail-we0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751015AbaEBJvu (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 May 2014 05:51:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [60.248.88.209] In-Reply-To: <1398876964.2182.13.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> References: <1398850855.1769.11.camel@localhost> <1398876964.2182.13.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 17:51:48 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1.0 1/11] arcmsr: Revise interrupt service routine relate function From: =?UTF-8?B?6buD5riF6ZqG?= To: James Bottomley Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "dan.carpenter@oracle.com" , "thenzl@redhat.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi James, Indeed, it makes you confusion that I mistake typing the subject. It should be [PATCH v1.0 1/16] , but not [PATCH v1.0 1/11]. Why I use v1.0 other than v1.4? Changing from 11 patches to 16 patches. Because I spend a long time to simplify each patch, so patch number is increase. It is easier to review. I am so sorry for late to response that make you are inconvenient. >>From now on, I will response quickly. Thanks for your advice. 2014-05-01 0:56 GMT+08:00 James Bottomley : > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 17:40 +0800, ching wrote: >> From: Ching >> >> Rewrite interrupt service routine relate function to fix command >> timeout on controller very heavy loading. > > OK, so I think you've confused us a bit. This looks to be an update of > your previous v1.4 patch set, yet it's now called v1.0? > > Could you please include a cover letter as patch 0/x like you see > everyone else doing on the list? In this cover letter can you tell us > what the disposition of the previous feedback is and what other changes > have you done? You didn't reply to any of the comments, have have you > fixed them? It's very dispiriting to review 11 patches, give feedback > and not hear anything ... and then have to review an even longer set of > patches just to see if anything was done about your previous comments. > > The less interactive you are with reviews, the less chance there is that > people will review updates ... without external reviewers, you go on a > very long backlog of things I have to review before the patches get in. > > James >