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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 F3634C43467 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 11:02:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90025215A4 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 11:02:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mg.codeaurora.org header.i=@mg.codeaurora.org header.b="YWrjF8eS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728894AbgJHLCR (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2020 07:02:17 -0400 Received: from m42-4.mailgun.net ([69.72.42.4]:48477 "EHLO m42-4.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725890AbgJHLCN (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2020 07:02:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1602154933; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: MIME-Version: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Date: References: Subject: Cc: To: From: Sender; bh=eJBexxd8ncXOiQfY+iAAWapiGqaBRPOkeIcaQjW/Sdw=; b=YWrjF8eSkGmjZXbnNp0Q7beglqF3IQsNz+GyWTHUXqiiU/8lJcWxSGTbuoMsBCad4ju96qwW qPRl/3jQrDJlCSpt2Cx1IiuZoX6Nx14EO3SUkMxLmkoIUwTWRAE4L7H5Q69f1v+24ZXcZdPU aOSrfe3SJPVN99twW13grR0hlYw= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 69.72.42.4 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI0MWYwYSIsICJsaW51eC1rZXJuZWxAdmdlci5rZXJuZWwub3JnIiwgImJlOWU0YSJd Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n07.prod.us-west-2.postgun.com with SMTP id 5f7ef170856d9308b50ff985 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Thu, 08 Oct 2020 11:01:04 GMT Sender: kvalo=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 0C905C433F1; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 11:01:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from potku.adurom.net (88-114-240-156.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.240.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C6B91C433CA; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 11:01:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org C6B91C433CA Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: =?utf-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWU=?= Pouiller Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] wfx: move out from the staging area References: <20201007101943.749898-1-Jerome.Pouiller@silabs.com> <20201007105513.GA1078344@kroah.com> <87ft6p2n0h.fsf@codeaurora.org> <16184307.3FagCOgvEJ@pc-42> Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2020 14:00:59 +0300 In-Reply-To: <16184307.3FagCOgvEJ@pc-42> (=?utf-8?B?IkrDqXLDtG1l?= Pouiller"'s message of "Thu, 08 Oct 2020 12:10:08 +0200") Message-ID: <87tuv50yok.fsf@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Pouiller writes: > On Thursday 8 October 2020 09:30:06 CEST Kalle Valo wrote: > [...] >> Yes, the driver needs to be reviewed in linux-wireless list. I recommend >> submitting the whole driver in a patchset with one file per patch, which >> seems to be the easiest way to review a full driver. The final move will >> be in just one commit moving the driver, just like patch 7 does here. As >> an example see how wilc1000 review was done. > > I see. I suppose it is still a bit complicated to review? Maybe I could > try to make things easier. > > For my submission to staging/ I had taken time to split the driver in an > understandable series of patches[1]. I think it was easier to review than > just sending files one by one. I could do the same thing for the > submission to linux-wireless. It would ask me a bit of work but, since I > already have a template, it is conceivable. > > Do you think it is worth it, or it would be an unnecessary effort? > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/driverdev-devel/20190919142527.31797-1-Jerome.Pou= iller@silabs.com/ > or commits a7a91ca5a23d^..40115bbc40e2 I don't know how others think, but I prefer to review new drivers "one file per patch" style as I get to see the big picture easily. And besides, splitting the driver like that would be a huge job for you. I don't think it's worth your time in this case. And making changes in the driver during review process becomes even more complex. --=20 https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatc= hes