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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 E0770C4338F for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 11:06:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5A8560EB5 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 11:06:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240309AbhHYLHb (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Aug 2021 07:07:31 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50524 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236038AbhHYLH3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Aug 2021 07:07:29 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62c.google.com (mail-ej1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA1DEC061757 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 04:06:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id u14so25850689ejf.13 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 04:06:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oXHXNjMFde3RZo3Oxerlx2/B9K7hyGDePqliIxHv4MA=; b=kFJPOezz5P+KBafIBtx5LkHwKkRJ8gvjuCuOmKNLsy1VV4GIZOVB+y5Oh9MP7bwnjg c5TNOS3nKVLBTlPhcb877vCCYeK7uh/9/NeiOYW40MyHwa5LRQpGqNBmiImS9Uha5o0V nCuIiWdythFAJ4EdNHvsT++8Y9FWC7+F5v/UrF/SEi0HdKvgH5S7jkLeUu0K4CUvhQAv svTyNqePO2dnyvfw/xwAZ7zB5hqA6Z+186eHhlaymBMPt9xZaJYluVhZF9Md1pYuIDga iVm17b4SZdlQ1ixl/vzkqRcectRASfTPP14RflXwmagkNL8JnYQ00XinfI/SJX8SnX+1 bDTA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oXHXNjMFde3RZo3Oxerlx2/B9K7hyGDePqliIxHv4MA=; b=PPDaKeyZhqWLg8Ez9CKZBCzbfCjTcwKVPI+DDAS4rVsfe5MYMvrrCGN5h/3NEsLKX1 pDE4vTZ1aV8UkngIX0BeSn41Etk1qYVwqCb5Haf88u2FKqI0/zexs/LprG2wrsBTaXXp tzxhsw/ifqwBY091P9sgebPKs9s/NmrOfBYGhGnOLFs86eqJ/6Q7Y7EGFkU6UxHbo+nP F1odY7CiUNOLntL+GmiITmXoK5H0LQvQC7lU3NMvsJMqMspeMMbvWVw4EXtQlAjpxtgi kj94zV9xuj1C0rPvRANE2y77kiKxivBp7/1nMsSsf/tKBNN10yIveEx2LbHkuk8nsA/v lS2g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5305SOTJ44ZbgMYFCRcDJZx5y9IZoZZgiJMaXO38wWQHO662qS1r QFkBU5en9YhSmwHRmQieJ/Nxoly/Oto= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwiRv4tF7NGkgUlL8yunBa4MTW70bNhkcmcV+TLo+TlZPs6Q3znBeeFglkMlyCHCCO7jtntSA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:7704:: with SMTP id kw4mr44804146ejc.23.1629889602317; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 04:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (host-79-22-100-164.retail.telecomitalia.it. [79.22.100.164]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q11sm2992305edv.73.2021.08.25.04.06.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 25 Aug 2021 04:06:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Fabio M. De Francesco" To: Pavel Skripkin , Dan Carpenter Cc: Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net, phil@philpotter.co.uk, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, straube.linux@gmail.com, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] staging: r8188eu: add error handling of rtw_read16 Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 13:06:40 +0200 Message-ID: <3494498.825kMHXWDN@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20210825103802.GS7722@kadam> References: <3396277b-6d80-b621-0ef0-71de7d581602@gmail.com> <20210825103802.GS7722@kadam> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday, August 25, 2021 12:38:02 PM CEST Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 01:13:54PM +0300, Pavel Skripkin wrote: > > On 8/25/21 1:06 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:55:37PM +0300, Pavel Skripkin wrote: > > > > The main problem, that no one knows who is the "old". Greg can take patches > > > > in any order he wants > > > > > > Patches are always taken in first come first serve. > > > > > > > > > OK, but if pending patch needs new version, then it will be taken at the > > end? > > Versions don't matter. No one is tracking any of that. > > A patch arrives. It is either applied or rejected. First come first > serve. > > > > > Here is the situation we have: > > > > I have the patch series based on old function behavior, it was > > posted first > > > > Then Fabio posted refactoring of the function and it changes > > return values. > > > > > > Both series are pending right now and made on top of staging-next branch. > > Who needs to rebase? I think, applying these series as-is can broke the > > driver, since error handling will be broken > > That's a bug then. The patch should be rejected. You're not allowed to > break the code. Sorry Dan, I disagree. It's not a bug. No one intend to break the code. How could anyone know that someone else is working simultaneously on some code that is not compatible with the work of the other developer? Pavel and I worked simultaneously on code based on the current Greg's tree. We incidentally got to know that mine breaks his. I suppose that Greg will take Pavel's work first, because it was submitted few hours before mine and then will ask me to take into account Pavel's patches, rebase, fix and resend mine. Each series is self contained and does not introduce bugs to the current tree. The bugs will arise when Greg will have applied one of the two series as usually in a FIFO order. There's no practical means to know who is working to what just by reading all the messages of the lists. Who reads all the messages before deciding to work on something? This issue will be solved a way or the other, I really don't think it is a big problem, it's unavoidable when a lot of people work on the same driver or subsystem. Regards, Fabio > Also don't write patches which lead to merge order breaking the code > silently. That makes it difficult for stable as well. For example, > don't do this: > > -void frob(int a, int b); > +void frob(int b, int a); > > In that case, you would change the name of the function so that the > build would break when people mix old and new code. > > regards, > dan carpenter > >