From: Vitalii Demianets <vitas@nppfactor.kiev.ua>
To: "Hans J. Koch" <hjk@hansjkoch.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Cong Ding <dinggnu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v3] Fix memory freeing issues
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:58:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201212171058.03013.vitas@nppfactor.kiev.ua> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121215172540.GB2589@local>
On Saturday 15 December 2012 19:25:40 Hans J. Koch wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:33:50AM +0200, Vitalii Demianets wrote:
> > Hans, why do you want to put in this patch, which is dealing with
> > memory-freeing issues only, completely unrelated functional changes?
>
> Because during review of your patch we happened to find another issue
> a few lines up and down. Why not fix it on the way?
>
Because my heart is not with your solution of irq-related problem. I can't do
it.
> If you like, make it two patches, one with your memory-freeing issue
> and one "Remove irq tracking" or something like that.
I've done exactly that. The series of two patches. First [patch 1/2] - deals
exclusively with memory freeing issues and you have no objections to it.
Second [patch 2/2] which we disagreed upon - deals with irq-related issues.
> That's just
> three or four lines difference, I'd even accept it if it were only
> one patch.
>
> I don't want to fix one thing now and leave the other one unresolved.
> That would just be a waste of time.
Me too. But we have different vision of the solution to the irq-related issue.
That's why I won't write the irq-related part.
Also, I don't understand, why do you want two unrelated fixes in one patch?
When they are separated, they are easier to discuss, study and revert if
needed.
>
> To be clear, I have no objections regarding your memory freeing ideas.
So, why not to stop here and accept this one patch? I won't write the
irq-related part anyway, as my heart is with the solution in [patch 2/2] and
you disagree with it.
So, the irq-related part should be done by someone else. Maybe by you, why
not?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-17 8:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-10 9:18 [PATCH 0/2] drivers/uio/uio_pdrv_genirq.c: FIx memory & concurrency issues Vitalii Demianets
2012-12-10 9:44 ` [PATCH 1/2 v3] Fix memory freeing issues Vitalii Demianets
2012-12-13 18:13 ` Hans J. Koch
2012-12-14 9:33 ` Vitalii Demianets
2012-12-15 17:25 ` Hans J. Koch
2012-12-17 8:58 ` Vitalii Demianets [this message]
2012-12-10 9:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] Fix concurrency issue Vitalii Demianets
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=201212171058.03013.vitas@nppfactor.kiev.ua \
--to=vitas@nppfactor.kiev.ua \
--cc=dinggnu@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hjk@hansjkoch.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.