On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 09:44:45AM +0100, Vincent Ficet wrote: > Hello, > > On 12/19/2016 08:10 AM, Weiny, Ira wrote: > >> On 12/9/2016 9:29 AM, Vincent Ficet wrote: > >>>> Would it be better to combine Bull Switch-IB and Switch-IB2 ranges > >>>> into one check rather than keeping them separate as the device IDs > >>>> are contiguous ? > >>> I just wanted to separate SwitchIB and SwitchIB2 for clarity, but we can gather > >> them if you wish to do so. > >>> Which option do you prefer, together or split ? > >> I prefer together. > > Together is fine by me. > > > > I was expecting a v2 of this patch. Was that your intention? > I attached the v3 of this patch to this mail following Hal's remarks and suggestions. > > The new code has been fully tested on our cluster and no regression was found. > > Please let me know whether the changes I made are acceptable. This was not a valid patch format. The patch applied with git am just fine but... I did not have a signed off by from you nor was there a good commit message. I went ahead and fixed both of those issues. So consider this applied. However, in the future could you please: 1) send the patch inline 2) use a proper signed off by line 3) have a proper commit message. Thanks, Ira > > > Best Regards, > > Vincent > > > > > > Ira > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
