Re: [PATCH V6 net-next 2/2] smc: introduce socket family AF_SMC

Ursula Braun
2015-09-25T07:27:13Z

On Mon, 2015-09-21 at 11:44 -0700, David Miller wrote:
...
> This is a huge and complex submission and I'm already burnt out
> reading the changes thus far.
>
> You have a lot to fix up and you can expect many revisions to be
> necessary before these changes are ready for integration upstream.
> And that's if you are lucky and someone actually continues to review
> this work.
>
Hi Dave,

I appreciate the time you have already spent analyzing my SMC code. It
is large and complex, and I understand that you are not willing to spend
the time to review the overall code in future iterations. Before me
spending more time on SMC, I need a hint about *your* preferred way to
submit that large piece of code in general, and about the overall future
of SMC:

- Supposed the SMC code is improved to an acceptable quality and maybe
even gets additional reviewers, are you willing to accept the code at
all, given it is self-contained (our own can of worms, as you said)?

- I realized that I have to split up the large chunk of code into
smaller patches. Do you prefer going with a first minimal self contained
patch set first, providing basic communication capabilities, and then
incrementally add features like failover, setsockopt, urgent-data etc.
over time? Or, on submissions, do you always want to see a patch series
of the full set of features and values according to the SMC design?

Kind regards,
Ursula