On 1/13/2022 9:38 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 04:19:41PM -0800, Iouri Tarassov wrote:
>
> On 1/12/2022 11:47 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 11:55:13AM -0800, Iouri Tarassov wrote:
> > > Implement various WDDM IOCTLs.
> > > Again, break this up into smaller pieces. Would you want to review
> > all
> > of these at the same time?
> >
> > Remember, you write code for people to review and understand first, and
> > the compiler second. With large changes like this, you are making it
> > difficult for people to review, which is your target audience.
> >
> > I'll stop here, please fix up this patch series into something that is
> > reviewable.
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
> states that "only post say 15 [patches] or so at a time and wait for review
> and integration".
> The IOCTLs here are simple and I tried to keep the number of patches smaller
> than 15. Is it ok to have more than 15 patches in a submission, or I need to
> submit the driver is several chunks (some of which would be not fully
> functional)?
We get patch series that are much longer all the time, that's fine. How
many do you feel would be needed to properly break this out?
Hi Greg,
I think there could be 20-25 patches.
Implementation of many IOCTLs follow the same pattern:
- add the IOCTL definition to the ioctl table
- implement a function to send the corresponding VM bus message to the host
- implement a function to handle the IOCTL input data, call the function to send
message to the host and copy results back to the caller.
I tried to combine several such implementations to a single patch.
I think the patch is logically simple and it would be easy to review.
What is your opinion?
Thanks
Iouri
