Re: [PATCH v3 00/23] perf: Add infrastructure and support for Intel PT

Ingo Molnar
2014-08-11T05:46:30Z

* Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Peter and all,
>
> Here's a new version of PT support patchset, this time including PT and
> BTS drivers and a few more tweaks to the core. I still left out some bits
> like core dump support for now. Tooling support is not included in this
> series so that it's easier to review the kernel bits, I suppose it's best
> to send it separately, since it's quite a huge patchset of its own.

I know what this series is about, but pretty please, always include a
complete introduction, or at least a link to a good introdcution,
which spells out the whole problem space, the proposed solution, its
various design trade-offs (if any), links to tooling for people who
want to have a look at both sides, list of items not yet properly
implemented [or a clear statement that it's all ready to go in your
view], etc., in as much detail as possible!

The reason is that many reviewers will skip early versions of patch
series, especially if they see something trivially objectionable in
it. Why spend effort on reviewing something that might never see the
light of the day? But if later re-sends of the series skip essential
information it's harder to 'jump in' and offer useful feedback...

If you worry about being overly verbose in your patch series
announcement, in my experience as a kernel maintainer it's literally
impossible for kernel developers to over-do the description of a new
feature. (Steve Rostedt tries on occasion but even he never succeeded
in the past. I claim this is due to software developer brain
structure, but I digress.)

It's also absolutely fine to cut & paste an old 0/N description over
and over again, and to update it only as far as the patches have
changed.

A good rule of thumb is to have at least as many sentences in the 0/N
description as there are patches in the series, i.e. 23 sentences in
this instance. Preferably scaled up by complexity.

Thanks,

Ingo