From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A85CC43381 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:19:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD9BE206B8 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:19:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=resnulli-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@resnulli-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="OztnVT2x" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731032AbfC0PTk (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:19:40 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com ([209.85.128.65]:38192 "EHLO mail-wm1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727141AbfC0PTe (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:19:34 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id w15so485545wmc.3 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 08:19:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=resnulli-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=KfLJanVXY61YCRElFkvD71/SNEcxjUcKSDSk5dFs59U=; b=OztnVT2xUXH9FFESgl0ILMsPGYpE17ANt4aqqF8OlSDwlmoxy4eNDwBkPmpfWuLVRX kQ0ez2yM1xbh30UvQirmL17zl3OC0O8kn7L69kopf0jRNFpv2jMJ4UCBP0ZHVVpiBDAg lK3byJ2763t43ll4uw0i/qEJcm8zkJNQTff8rBgha9uhd/eq3gbCG9RKzbdk4B5OYY33 2dTd/xMrFdYiA0pieCLnSne5sbTqzq/iKTfYrStH/U5e3QiR1e9QOfg2nP4iGb2gTydG sqby7kBPyxIywoUBxBaw2HxUwnYMX60fxInFtOf2WZ1IEfKh7rbQiOctu9Y+/iJTA8rB QyLA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=KfLJanVXY61YCRElFkvD71/SNEcxjUcKSDSk5dFs59U=; b=iyWNOc6EWve5LKAD9NYwLSAIUmh1BZKencGE5ycBg/jBH/KCUrtI3cw8P4UXdstQm8 5y4KDHO7qAoUKryv/Z6XF605QjJxuak/pn3MBEh+eyG/Md2qeFqPaaia13jkwWsxiwm9 ikQiSDqtuD9xvAAcLsByNG7xINOVkAOgJ8bk2uKwHalcGzQLiC+fCrpZTuQzqvNwxq7a tgk8k8AtqakmE4PeG9eQwe7osE8B/LBn5/ttVa8oBIEIHkvp2u43sgcMxmpw1SXMZ6Ft 6SoyfvpKoed0i10dkJS51VMgi+eeanv52aX/avK7x+IRkA40XCSfSAsFTSF6L9J6Q6Dg +R9A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUfYeLFOq2GeLYTPBlqgEY6nZYqlwDN4O4V+hcnIe24qEBqkGeB uPrS3a5L+SQQWhMaC1Ul+/moFg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxT77TkQ+TimdJwqZuutiVNWK6/+rHDsyNFm/kbrB+Vmc7ugs3HObg6zhZSgDIgNrjB4caAyw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1a46:: with SMTP id a67mr12108594wma.21.1553699972880; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 08:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-94-113-223-73.net.upcbroadband.cz. [94.113.223.73]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a82sm418800wmf.11.2019.03.27.08.19.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 08:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 16:19:31 +0100 From: Jiri Pirko To: Michal Kubecek Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski , Andrew Lunn , Florian Fainelli , John Linville , Stephen Hemminger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 00/22] ethtool netlink interface, part 1 Message-ID: <20190327151931.GD14297@nanopsycho> References: <20190327130928.GC14297@nanopsycho> <20190327142806.GT26076@unicorn.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190327142806.GT26076@unicorn.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 03:28:06PM CET, mkubecek@suse.cz wrote: >On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 02:09:28PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Could you please perhaps split the patchset so it contains max ~15 patches? > >Would 1-17 still be acceptable? The thing is that patch 16 is the first >where some "normal" notification (i.e. not EVENT one) is sent and >patch 17 is the first implementation of a request modifying data. >I believe having at least one example of both querying and setting data >would help the review discussion. > >Or perhaps I could leave GET_INFO related patches (at least second and >third) for later. I think 17 is okay. Please split if possible. > >Michal