Re: [PATCH] mdadm: split off shared library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 9/14/21 3:26 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 9/14/21 9:08 AM, Xiao Ni wrote:
>> Hi Hannes
>>
>> Thanks for these patches. It's a good idea to make codes more clearly
>> that which codes belong to which file.
>> There are many efforts that move codes from mdadm.c and mdadm.h to
>> specific files. Is it better to put these
>> patches together? For example, the patches(6, 11, 12, 16, 19, 20, 27,
>> 28) try to clean mdadm.c. Could you put
>> similar patches together? And there are some rename patches too, they
>> are sporadic.
>>
> Sure. Wasn't sure how you'd like to handle it; some prefer smaller
> patches, some prefer less patches overall ...

Sorry I missed this mainly because it had PATCH in the title and I
didn't feel the shared library subject was an urgent issue. I am not
opposed to splitting things into a shared library, in fact I believe I
suggested this to Neil many years ago. I don't remember why it didn't
happen at the time.

That said, I don't think it's something that is appropriate for 4.2, but
rather something to target for 5.0.

For something like this I would prefer smaller patches so it's possible
to bisect our way back if something broke in the process. Jumbo patches
are always wrong.

Cheers,
Jes



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux