From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85E82C00140 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2022 19:28:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4M7w0r3wzbz3dtZ for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 05:28:44 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=FM9byKd6; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=145.40.68.75; helo=ams.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=kuba@kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=FM9byKd6; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4M7w0B0Sx9z3blx for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2022 05:28:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2AFB6B8240D; Thu, 18 Aug 2022 19:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D0ADC433D7; Thu, 18 Aug 2022 19:28:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1660850884; bh=VYr1cXw3LttyNg8S5eNSk0+UacR8DxuCWqi7NjshbRU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=FM9byKd6qcfcDmD0eBSzpaDPPzMZAEUB7JouthTYlFxb/LXF6qvLMk+6ScwYtoAIj eJv5DzbLQLA7DejgW/cSZYCJ3qaQVC8ABS2l6RrWf43xLYUJbfb1pzakRb9TsZ6fVp nsmt51ZFDx6HVXas4b+7sCEw+o1WLWqjO0WuszBrDguRd4w+7P+0Hvdk/yF8r/yOFv Hst78VM1/T/u9PPBlU+o3qDx2N8zSLJ4hdEs1prvWrh+8uTN/hde/HP3ZcPflD4GJ4 MjRN6iFOLp0guhclFzd2JcoCfKHjHI0gTInXHVxqy2jugTil3/gRglspGNGMZpOX55 khUap8XBuMrtA== Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 12:28:03 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Sean Anderson Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH net-next v4 00/25] net: dpaa: Cleanups in preparation for phylink conversion Message-ID: <20220818122803.21f7294d@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <583c7997-fb01-63ad-775e-b6a8a8e93566@seco.com> References: <20220818161649.2058728-1-sean.anderson@seco.com> <20220818112054.29cd77fb@kernel.org> <20220818115815.72809e33@kernel.org> <583c7997-fb01-63ad-775e-b6a8a8e93566@seco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Madalin Bucur , netdev@vger.kernel.org, open list , Li Yang , Eric Dumazet , Rob Herring , Camelia Groza , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Paolo Abeni , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S . Miller" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 15:14:04 -0400 Sean Anderson wrote: > > Ack, no question. I'm trying to tell you got to actually get stuff in. > > It's the first week after the merge window and people are dumping code > > the had written over the dead time on the list, while some reviewers > > and maintainers are still on their summer vacation. So being > > considerate is even more important than normally. > > OK, so perhaps a nice place to split the series is after patch 11. If > you would like to review/apply a set of <15 patches, that is the place > to break things. I can of course resend again with just those, if that's > what I need to do to get these applied. Mm, okay, let's give folks the customary 24h to object, otherwise I'll pull in the first 11 tomorrow. > That said, I specifically broke this series up into many small patches > to make it easier to review. Each patch does exactly one thing. Had I > known about these limits based on patch size, I would have just squashed > everything into 15 patches. I think an arbitrary limit such as this has > a perverse incentive. Practically speaking I think it works out fairly nicely, IDK. There's trade offs like always. Takes a bit of getting used to.