On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 03:37:17PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 06:41:36PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > [ ... ] > > > > No doubt about that. I had some ideas and thought it is easier to talk > > over code. If you want to rebase it, too, I'd be happy to check what you > > came up with to solve the problems. I might still argue that I prefer > > the less-code approach, but it will be Guenter's / Wim's decision, of > > course. > > > I have a large back-log of patches to review. Simple patches with less code > will get preferential treating. The more complex, the higher the likelyhood > that the patches get pushed to the end of the queue. > > Giving a quick glance, I liked Wolfram's patches because they seemed to > be simple and straightforward. I hope the next version won't add too much > additional complexity. Vladimir, did you have time to look into this? I can offer to resend this series on-top of v4.7-rc1 with the core patch re-attributed to Vladimir. Then we can review the basic stuff now, and can discuss/deal with the bottom half handling incrementally. Sounds good?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
