Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 15/16] net: dsa: felix: setup MMIO filtering rules for PTP when using tag_8021q

From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
	Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
	Alexandru Marginean <alexandru.marginean@nxp.com>,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	Xiaoliang Yang <xiaoliang.yang_1@nxp.com>,
	Hongbo Wang <hongbo.wang@nxp.com>,
	Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
	Po Liu <po.liu@nxp.com>, Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com>,
	Maxim Kochetkov <fido_max@inbox.ru>,
	Eldar Gasanov <eldargasanov2@gmail.com>,
	Andrey L <al@b4comtech.com>,
	UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 15/16] net: dsa: felix: setup MMIO filtering rules for PTP when using tag_8021q
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 12:58:13 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210120125813.3e04e132@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210120173241.4jfqhsm725wqeqic@skbuf>

On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:32:41 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 08:40:42AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c:464:12: warning: variable ‘err’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
> >   464 |  int port, err;
> >       |            ^~~
> > drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c:265:53: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> > drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c:265:53:    expected unsigned short [usertype]
> > drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c:265:53:    got restricted __be16 [usertype]
> >
> >
> > Please build test the patches locally, the patchwork testing thing is
> > not keeping up with the volume, and it's running on the largest VM
> > available thru the provider already :/  
> 
> I updated my compiler now, so that W=1 C=1 builds would not fail.
> That should hopefully prevent this from happening in the future.

Thanks.

> > I need to add this "don't post your patches to get them build tested
> > or you'll make Kuba very angry" to the netdev FAQ.  
> 
> Since I definitely don't want to upset Kuba,

:)

> how bad is it to exceed the 15 patches per series limit? Do I need to
> do something about it?

It's not a hard rule IIUC, if you have 16, 17 patches as an atomic
series which is hard to split, I'd think that's acceptable from time 
to time. Especially if the patches themselves are not huge.
If you're already splitting a larger effort, keeping it < 15 is best.
In general if you can split a smaller logically contained series out
that's always preferred. The point is if the series is too large
reviewers are likely to postpone reviewing it until they can allocate
sufficiently large continuous block of time, which may be never.
It's all about efficient code review.

At least that's my recollection / understanding. There may be more
reasons, we'd have to ask Dave.