From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Grover Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 0/8] target: Save memory on unused se_dev_entrys and se_luns Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 10:02:23 -0700 Message-ID: <5421A79F.9010003@redhat.com> References: <1404171587-28845-1-git-send-email-agrover@redhat.com> <20140729131511.GA30232@lst.de> <20140913195557.GA32118@lst.de> <1411025936.13381.183.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> <541B629B.6090406@redhat.com> <1411082258.28382.17.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1411082258.28382.17.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> Sender: target-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , target-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 09/18/2014 04:17 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > I'm currently reviewing #2, #4, #5 and #7 and will consider merging > these. These cleanups account for most of the LOC reduction, and avoid > most of the larger concerns. > > Also for patches like this, they really need testing on your end before > I'll consider them merging. Compile testing alone for these types of > locking changes is not enough, given the history of regressions with > these types of cleanups. OK. I'll look for those to show up in your tree, then? And work on better dividing up of the remaining changes, and also minimize their risk of causing regressions. Regards -- Andy