From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC+CFT] Use word operations in bitops
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:32:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110118153257.GA10686@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110117104618.GB18626@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Hi Russell,
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:46:18AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:08:57AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 12:19:11PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > This does need a fair amount of testing before it can be merged, so I'd
> > > like to see a number of Tested-by's against this patch. Please also
> > > indicate whether you tested on LE or BE or both, which filesystems, and
> > > whether they were read-only mounted or read-write mounted.
> > You could make life a bit easier (at least for us at Pengutronix,
> > probably more) if you had a branch with a defined name for patches like
> > these. We could add that to our daily test then.
>
> No, because then it's not possible to properly tie down what has been
> tested and what hasn't.
>
> The advantage of emailed patches is that when people reply to them, you
> have a better idea that the patch to which they're replying to is the
> one they tested.
>
> Such as in this case where the follow-up patch hasn't received any
> replies, and so I can't add the one received tested-by to the follow-up
> patch. With the git approach, I wouldn't know what was tested unless
> you included the commit IDs each time.
>
> And let's face it - if it was tested daily, are you going to go through
> the hastle of digging out the commit IDs and emailing each day to say
> what was tested? That sounds to me like a _lot_ more work than testing
> the occasional emailed patch.
I maybe wouldn't report each success, I would report if my test fails.
You can consider this more or less valuable. Still I think given the
ease this could be done it's worth it.
That's how linux-next works, too.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe Kleine-König)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC+CFT] Use word operations in bitops
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:32:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110118153257.GA10686@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110117104618.GB18626@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Hi Russell,
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:46:18AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:08:57AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 12:19:11PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > This does need a fair amount of testing before it can be merged, so I'd
> > > like to see a number of Tested-by's against this patch. Please also
> > > indicate whether you tested on LE or BE or both, which filesystems, and
> > > whether they were read-only mounted or read-write mounted.
> > You could make life a bit easier (at least for us at Pengutronix,
> > probably more) if you had a branch with a defined name for patches like
> > these. We could add that to our daily test then.
>
> No, because then it's not possible to properly tie down what has been
> tested and what hasn't.
>
> The advantage of emailed patches is that when people reply to them, you
> have a better idea that the patch to which they're replying to is the
> one they tested.
>
> Such as in this case where the follow-up patch hasn't received any
> replies, and so I can't add the one received tested-by to the follow-up
> patch. With the git approach, I wouldn't know what was tested unless
> you included the commit IDs each time.
>
> And let's face it - if it was tested daily, are you going to go through
> the hastle of digging out the commit IDs and emailing each day to say
> what was tested? That sounds to me like a _lot_ more work than testing
> the occasional emailed patch.
I maybe wouldn't report each success, I would report if my test fails.
You can consider this more or less valuable. Still I think given the
ease this could be done it's worth it.
That's how linux-next works, too.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-18 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-16 12:19 [RFC+CFT] Use word operations in bitops Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-16 12:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-16 18:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-16 18:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-17 11:03 ` Jamie Iles
2011-01-17 11:03 ` Jamie Iles
2011-01-17 9:46 ` Jamie Iles
2011-01-17 9:46 ` Jamie Iles
2011-01-17 10:08 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-17 10:08 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-17 10:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-17 10:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-18 15:32 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2011-01-18 15:32 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-18 15:43 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-18 15:43 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-18 15:58 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-18 15:58 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-18 16:28 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-18 16:28 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110118153257.GA10686@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.