Hi James, Indeed, it makes you confusion that I mistake typing the subject. It should be [PATCH v1.0 1/16] , but not [PATCH v1.0 1/11]. Why I use v1.0 other than v1.4? Changing from 11 patches to 16 patches. Because I spend a long time to simplify each patch, so patch number is increase. It is easier to review. I am so sorry for late to response that make you are inconvenient. >From now on, I will response quickly. Thanks for your advice. 2014-05-01 0:56 GMT+08:00 James Bottomley <jbottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 17:40 +0800, ching wrote: >> From: Ching<ching2048@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Rewrite interrupt service routine relate function to fix command >> timeout on controller very heavy loading. > > OK, so I think you've confused us a bit. This looks to be an update of > your previous v1.4 patch set, yet it's now called v1.0? > > Could you please include a cover letter as patch 0/x like you see > everyone else doing on the list? In this cover letter can you tell us > what the disposition of the previous feedback is and what other changes > have you done? You didn't reply to any of the comments, have have you > fixed them? It's very dispiriting to review 11 patches, give feedback > and not hear anything ... and then have to review an even longer set of > patches just to see if anything was done about your previous comments. > > The less interactive you are with reviews, the less chance there is that > people will review updates ... without external reviewers, you go on a > very long backlog of things I have to review before the patches get in. > > James > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
