On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 8:22 PM Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 18:39 -0600, Nick Crews wrote: > > Hi Rushikesh, I know I've been reviewing this on Chromium, but I have > > some more larges-scale design thoughts. > Hi Nick. > > Does this fundamentally change, the way it is done here or can wait for > subsequent revisions later? I don't have any official stakes in this, as I'm not the maintainer or anything, so I'm just preaching what I think would be good design :) I think I would like to see most of my suggestions addressed. At the very least there are some actual bugs (infinite loops, accessing bad memory, not reporting all errors) that need to get fixed. Of course I'm not the one that has to write or test it, but I imagine that the one large design change I proposed of where memory is allocated shouldn't be too hard either. I worry that "subsequent revisions" to upstream won't happen, since it's hard enough to get a patch accepted. Maybe that concern isn't warranted though, I don't have that much experience on the LKML. Is there a really tight deadline for this? If so then I would say we should apply what we currently have to the Chromium tree, and upstream the final version when it's done. Thanks, Nick > > Thanks, > Srinivas >
