From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753128AbcKSTrC (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Nov 2016 14:47:02 -0500 Received: from mail-oi0-f65.google.com ([209.85.218.65]:34420 "EHLO mail-oi0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752699AbcKSTq7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Nov 2016 14:46:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <58466423-c87e-3921-101e-bffab8989fd8@redhat.com> <20161117184950.GP4240@leon.nu> <582E089A.3040106@redhat.com> <20161117200203.GQ4240@leon.nu> From: Or Gerlitz Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 21:46:58 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] Please pull rdma.git To: Doug Ledford Cc: linux-rdma , Linux Kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:01 AM, Doug Ledford wrote: > On 11/17/2016 5:24 PM, Or Gerlitz wrote: [...] > I agree with you. It doesn't fix your patch. The commit message can > still be fixed up. >> Please do not send it to Linus and wait for them to respond. I >> disagree that it fixes my commit b/c my commit was prior to when >> route-able RoCE was introduced and on that time TOS had no relation. > I agree. A better fix tag would be the commit that added RoCEv2 support. But this is the smaller part of the problem. The bigger part is that I have asked for clarifications on the patch and they didn't provide anything. So if you are picking patches where a reviewer comments are ignored, what lesson are you teaching the submitter, that he can just continue with this practice? why you letting this go that way? >> does a tiny enhancement for a 10y old commit of Roland, why you think >> we need it in 4.9-rc6 or 7?? > I don't, it's in the mlx-next branch which means I'll queue it up for > the 4.10 merge window. I have no plan on sending that branch for 4.9-rc. Are you going to comment on that to the submitter? if not, they are going to continue with this practice. How are we supposed to realize from patchworks + your github branches that patches that were submitted for 4.9-rc are picked for 4.10? this is very confusing and error prone too. Please comment also on the bunch of patches I pointed you where the copy you have picked into your tree (pulled it from somewhere?) isn't what was submitted. Or.