From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: William Allen Simpson Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH v4 3/3] TCPCT part 1c: initial SYN exchange with SYNACK data Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 11:17:07 -0500 Message-ID: <4AEF0603.7060502@gmail.com> References: <4AE6E35C.2050101@gmail.com> <4AE6E7C0.2050408@gmail.com> <4AEDDF33.9030205@gmail.com> <4AEECFA8.1080306@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= , Eric Dumazet To: Linux Kernel Network Developers Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f228.google.com ([209.85.219.228]:56140 "EHLO mail-ew0-f228.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755542AbZKBQRJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 11:17:09 -0500 Received: by ewy28 with SMTP id 28so4992843ewy.18 for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2009 08:17:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ilpo J=E4rvinen wrote: > Are you talking about particular case?!? ...You can safely split into= even=20 > more parts if there are cleanups which is essential. ...We'll not sto= p you=20 > from doing that nor be angry if do that. >=20 Actually, my earliest posting split the original single patch, and Mill= er *did* seem angry. I had to put it back together again -- and then he only commented on one thing that *was* in my first post, causing me to have to redo the entire thing a third time. So, I've been posting patc= hes in bigger groups than I originally write and test. > That kind of response certainly won't help you any. ...First, you sai= d you=20 > adapt the current style but for some reason immediately start to say = why=20 > you would careless about that principle. ...Also, telling that you ha= ve=20 > lots of experience here and there will not get you there either ;-). >=20 I meant I adapt to existing style (no matter how odd) in places where I= 'm patching, so that *patches* are easier to review -- and write in a more elegant style where I'm making a significant stand-alone addition. I'd thought that constant-left style was pretty common around here, as = grep tells me there are hundreds upon hundreds of examples in arch, drivers,= net, and sound.... Seems like I'm not alone. Eric Dumazet wrote: # Cooking patches to linux is not only matter of good ideas and program= ming (and Dropping # patches for the masses). # # Its also a matter of convincing _people_ that your additions will be = maintainable # when you leave kernel programming and let people like us correct bugs= =2E # # For the moment, I am not convinced at all. I prefer to talk now. # OK, I'm talking. Thank you. Linux already has a fair amount of my code in it, often hard to recogni= ze now after 15 years, so I'm pretty sure that my code has been found maintainable in the past. Anyway, I don't want to argue about it on an open mailing list. I'm mo= re interested in getting work done! # Note: I did read your TCPCT 25 pages documentation and very am intere= sted by this # improvement, but its _also_ important to implement it in the normal w= ay. # (I wish this document could be public in a RFC form) # It will be, when we have running code, as I'm loath to publish until I'= m certain it *can* be implemented. I've something like 40 RFCs published over the years.