On 1/26/2017 8:44 AM, Amrani, Ram wrote:
>> I took these, but I would like to point out a couple things. First,
>> the commit messages could use some work. I fixed a number of them up.
>> Also, a fix to formatting isn't really an -rc fix. I took it, but
>> next time let's be more selective on our submission please.
>>
>
> Thanks.
> I have reviewed your changes for next time. I understood all but these:
>
> I thought that introducing formatting fixes and making functions static are
> simplifying and risk free operations that are acceptable.
Yes and no. They are risk free, but they also provide 0 benefit to the
actual running of the kernel. Therefore, to reduce churn during -rc
cycle kernels, you would normally not submit them. You would hold on to
them until the next merge window.
> I now understand,
> and correct me if I'm wrong, that only if it's important fix it should be introduced.
Correct.
> Sometimes I see IB/vendor and sometimes RDMA/vendor. When to use each?
I'm trying to transition people over to using RDMA/* as much as possible
because the stack is much more than just IB these days. But if someone
sends me patches that have IB/ as the prefix, I don't go in and modify
every subject line. So, when I modified your subject lines, I used
RDMA, the IB subject lines you see in my current queue are from other
people.
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>
GPG Key ID: B826A3330E572FDD
Key fingerprint = AE6B 1BDA 122B 23B4 265B 1274 B826 A333 0E57 2FDD
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
