From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932599AbWF0HKF (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 03:10:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932556AbWF0HJd (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 03:09:33 -0400 Received: from mx1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:49027 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030738AbWF0HJ0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 03:09:26 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:06:09 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Nigel Cunningham Cc: Jens Axboe , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Suspend2][ 0/9] Extents support. Message-ID: <20060627070609.GA28730@kroah.com> References: <20060626165404.11065.91833.stgit@nigel.suspend2.net> <200606271428.11654.nigel@suspend2.net> <20060627053623.GG22071@suse.de> <200606271539.29540.nigel@suspend2.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200606271539.29540.nigel@suspend2.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 03:39:26PM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > Hi. > > On Tuesday 27 June 2006 15:36, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 27 2006, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > > > On Tuesday 27 June 2006 07:20, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Monday 26 June 2006 18:54, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > > Add Suspend2 extent support. Extents are used for storing the lists > > > > > of blocks to which the image will be written, and are stored in the > > > > > image header for use at resume time. > > > > > > > > Could you please put all of the changes in kernel/power/extents.c into > > > > one patch? ?It's quite difficult to review them now, at least for me. > > > > > > I spent a long time splitting them up because I was asked in previous > > > iterations to break them into manageable chunks. How about if I were to > > > email you the individual files off line, so as to not send the same > > > amount again? > > > > Managable chunks means logical changes go together, one function per > > diff is really extreme and unreviewable. Support for extents is one > > logical change, so it's one patch. Unless of course you have to do some > > preparatory patches, then you'd do those separately. > > > > I must admit I thought you were kidding when I read through this extents > > patch series, having a single patch just adding includes! > > Sorry for fluffing it up. I'm pretty inexperienced, but I'm trying to follow > CodingStyle and all the other advice. If I'd known I'd misunderstood what was > wanted, I probably could have submitted this months ago. Oh well. Live and > learn. What would you have me do at this point? Please break things up into logical steps to solve the problem, and try it again. Oh, and as a meta-comment, why /proc? You know that's not acceptable, right? thanks, greg k-h