From: "Íñigo Huguet" <ihuguet@redhat.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: ecree.xilinx@gmail.com, habetsm.xilinx@gmail.com,
richardcochran@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net,
edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Yalin Li <yalli@redhat.com>, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] sfc: support unicast PTP
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:08:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACT4oueX=MyKoUmzUs5Cdc0k5SuhavY=Toe_EGPgPOA8rVCmRw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230201110541.1cf6ba7f@kernel.org>
On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 8:05 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 09:08:45 +0100 Íñigo Huguet wrote:
> > v2: fixed missing IS_ERR
> > added doc of missing fields in efx_ptp_rxfilter
>
> 1. don't repost within 24h, *especially* if you're reposting
> because of compilation problems
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html
Sorry, I wasn't aware of this.
> 2. please don't repost in a thread, it makes it harder for me
> to maintain a review queue
What do you mean? I sent it with `git send-email --in-reply-to`, I
thought this was the canonical way to send a v2 and superseed the
previous version.
> 3. drop the pointless inline in the source file in patch 4
>
> +static inline void efx_ptp_remove_one_filter(struct efx_nic *efx,
> + struct efx_ptp_rxfilter *rxfilter)
This is the second time I get pushback because of this. Could you
please explain the rationale of not allowing it?
I understand that the compiler probably will do the right thing with
or without the `inline`, and more being in the same translation unit.
Actually, I checked the style guide [1] and I thought it was fine like
this: it says that `inline` should not be abused, but it's fine in
cases like this one. Quotes from the guide:
"Generally, inline functions are preferable to macros resembling functions"
"A reasonable rule of thumb is to not put inline at functions that
have more than 3 lines of code in them"
I have the feeling that if I had made it as a macro it had been
accepted, but inline not, despite the "prefer inline over macro".
I don't mind changing it, but I'd like to understand it so I can
remember the next time. And if it's such a hard rule that it's
considered a "fail" in the patchwork checks, maybe it should be
documented somewhere.
Thanks!
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html
--
Íñigo Huguet
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-02 7:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-31 16:05 [PATCH net 0/4] sfc: support unicast PTP Íñigo Huguet
2023-01-31 16:05 ` [PATCH net 1/4] sfc: store PTP filters in a list Íñigo Huguet
2023-01-31 16:05 ` [PATCH net 2/4] sfc: allow insertion of filters for unicast PTP Íñigo Huguet
2023-01-31 16:05 ` [PATCH net 3/4] sfc: support " Íñigo Huguet
2023-01-31 16:05 ` [PATCH net 4/4] sfc: remove expired unicast PTP filters Íñigo Huguet
2023-01-31 17:46 ` kernel test robot
2023-02-01 16:09 ` kernel test robot
2023-02-01 8:08 ` [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] sfc: support unicast PTP Íñigo Huguet
2023-02-01 8:08 ` [PATCH net-next v2 1/4] sfc: store PTP filters in a list Íñigo Huguet
2023-02-02 12:13 ` Martin Habets
2023-02-01 8:08 ` [PATCH net-next v2 2/4] sfc: allow insertion of filters for unicast PTP Íñigo Huguet
2023-02-01 8:08 ` [PATCH net-next v2 3/4] sfc: support " Íñigo Huguet
2023-02-02 13:22 ` Martin Habets
2023-02-01 8:08 ` [PATCH net-next v2 4/4] sfc: remove expired unicast PTP filters Íñigo Huguet
2023-02-02 14:12 ` Martin Habets
2023-02-03 15:18 ` Íñigo Huguet
2023-02-03 15:29 ` Íñigo Huguet
2023-02-01 19:05 ` [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] sfc: support unicast PTP Jakub Kicinski
2023-02-02 7:08 ` Íñigo Huguet [this message]
2023-02-02 8:34 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-02-02 9:17 ` Íñigo Huguet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CACT4oueX=MyKoUmzUs5Cdc0k5SuhavY=Toe_EGPgPOA8rVCmRw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ihuguet@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ecree.xilinx@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=habetsm.xilinx@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=yalli@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).