Re: [PATCH v5 22/26] t7700: consolidate code into test_no_missing_in_packs()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> Especially if it is near the end of the series, just a single step
>> is OK.  But is there anything that is glaringly wrong that needs a
>> reroll?  Or would it be "this is good enough, so let's have them
>> cook in 'next' and graduate to 'master'---further clean-up can be
>> done after all the dust settles"?  I have an impression that we
>> reached the latter by now.
>
> Perhaps the log message could use some improvement to document the
> discussion we had? I don't know if that's worth a reroll, though. Aside
> from that, I agree that it's ready for 'next'.

Sure, let's see what you have in mind.

Thanks for working on this.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux