From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [RFC] hpsa: addressing review comments Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:24:56 -0500 Message-ID: <1236954296.3276.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090313142054.GB15269@beardog.cca.cpqcorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from accolon.hansenpartnership.com ([76.243.235.52]:57165 "EHLO accolon.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750910AbZCMOY7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:24:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090313142054.GB15269@beardog.cca.cpqcorp.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "Mike Miller (OS Dev)" Cc: LKML-SCSI On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 09:20 -0500, Mike Miller (OS Dev) wrote: > sorry, I fat fingered the address first time around... > > Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:18:49 -0500 > From: "Mike Miller (OS Dev)" > To: LKML , lkml-scis@beardog.cca.cpqcorp.net > Cc: Steve Cameron , tom.lawler@hp.com, > iss_storagedev@hp.com > Subject: [RFC] hpsa: addressing review comments > > I have a question about the hpsa driver we recently released. We've received > quite a few comments, very positive overall. When we make the changes noted, > i.e., rip out /proc, style changes, etc., do we submit patches for that? Or > repost the entire driver with the appropriate changelog? Either is fine with me. Posting update patches is very useful to people who want to see what changes have been made between versions. When we iterate to a final version, then you can repost the whole thing (so it can go into the tree as one to avoid bisection problems). James