From: Ursula Braun <ubraun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: utz.bacher@de.ibm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com,
heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, ursula.braun@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 net-next 2/2] smc: introduce socket family AF_SMC
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 09:27:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1443166033.6021.6.camel@BR9GV9YG.de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150921.114425.119948328742744162.davem@davemloft.net>
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
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-25 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-14 10:42 [PATCH V6 net-next 0/2] net: implement SMC-R solution Ursula Braun
2015-09-14 10:42 ` [PATCH V6 net-next 1/2] net: introduce socket family constants Ursula Braun
2015-09-14 10:42 ` [PATCH V6 net-next 2/2] smc: introduce socket family AF_SMC Ursula Braun
2015-09-21 18:44 ` David Miller
2015-09-25 7:27 ` Ursula Braun [this message]
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=1443166033.6021.6.camel@BR9GV9YG.de.ibm.com \
--to=ubraun@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=ursula.braun@de.ibm.com \
--cc=utz.bacher@de.ibm.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox