On 30 June 2015 at 17:40, Hin-Tak Leung <hintak.leung@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 28 June 2015 at 19:52, Sergei Antonov <saproj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > <snipped> >> If I fix something else in hfsplus in the future, will you again >> submit a combined hfsplus+hfs patch? I would prefer separation. Hoped >> to receive your "Tested-by:" for my "hfsplus: release bnode pages >> after use, not before" and then submit a V2 of it with a longer >> description. > > Possibly yes, if the patch description is clearly unsatisfactory and > deemed incomprehensible, and you have not re-submitted a v2 > within a reasonable time. I already explained why I re-submitted > with a different patch description in the first of 3 below: > > [PATCH 0/2] two patches about B-tree corruptions in hfs and hfsplus > [PATCH v2] hfs,hfsplus: cache pages correctly between bnode_create and > [PATCH] hfs: fix B-tree corruption after insertion at position 0 > > Please just re-submit v2 yourself if more than a few people thinks your patch > description is unsatisfactory, instead of waiting for somebody else to > do it for you; > and also please just say "thank you", when others are willing spend their > valuable time to look at and check and verify what you do. This "what I do" fixes the problem you have been complaining about for years. The historical research you have done is interesting, but simple testing is to be expected in the first place. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
