From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] - Potential performance bottleneck for Linxu TCP Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:53:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20061129.165311.45739865.davem@davemloft.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:48877 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S967754AbWK3AxI (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:53:08 -0500 To: wenji@fnal.gov In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Please, it is very difficult to review your work the way you have submitted this patch as a set of 4 patches. These patches have not been split up "logically", but rather they have been split up "per file" with the same exact changelog message in each patch posting. This is very clumsy, and impossible to review, and wastes a lot of mailing list bandwith. We have an excellent file, called Documentation/SubmittingPatches, in the kernel source tree, which explains exactly how to do this correctly. By splitting your patch into 4 patches, one for each file touched, it is impossible to review your patch as a logical whole. Please also provide your patch inline so people can just hit reply in their mail reader client to quote your patch and comment on it. This is impossible with the attachments you've used. Thanks.