From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kleber Sacilotto de Souza Subject: Re: [PATCH] mlx4: Add support for EEH error recovery Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:02:08 -0300 Message-ID: <50100A70.7010605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1342814143-5744-1-git-send-email-klebers@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120724.140353.1432900101600410863.davem@davemloft.net> <5010070B.5040405@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Or Gerlitz , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, jackm@dev.mellanox.co.il, yevgenyp@mellanox.co.il, ogerlitz@mellanox.com, cascardo@linux.vnet.ibm.com, brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: Shlomo Pongartz Return-path: Received: from e24smtp05.br.ibm.com ([32.104.18.26]:37396 "EHLO e24smtp05.br.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030192Ab2GYPCb (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:02:31 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e24smtp05.br.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:02:29 -0300 Received: from d24relay02.br.ibm.com (d24relay02.br.ibm.com [9.13.184.26]) by d24dlp01.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E12C9352004F for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:02:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (d24av01.br.ibm.com [9.8.31.91]) by d24relay02.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q6PF1LvE45809908 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:01:21 -0300 Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q6PD23gK005925 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 10:02:04 -0300 In-Reply-To: <5010070B.5040405@mellanox.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/25/2012 11:47 AM, Shlomo Pongartz wrote: > On 7/25/2012 1:30 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:03 AM, David Miller wrote: >> >>> Or, you promised an ACK today, I still haven't seen it. >> It turned out that reacted we did, but not the ACK way. >> >> Again, code review wise, we intended to ack it, but Shlomo has set >> testing environment, under which he had some issues with the patch, as >> such he preferred not to ACK it but rather bring up the issues on the >> list and sort them out 1st. I thought it would be wrong to over-rule >> this preference of him, and this way is fair-enough with the author >> and your guide-lines, maybe I had to be more aggressive with ACKing >> this, as of the merge window closing coming. So tomorrow. >> >> Or. >> >>> There is no reason Kleber should be penalized and have his work >>> miss the merge window just because you guys can't be bothered >>> to approve this patch in a reasonable amount of time. >>> >>> Therefore I'm just going to apply it later today, and don't do this >>> with someone's submission ever again, it impedes progress and >>> frustrates contributors. >> . >> > > Hi Kleber, > > > > I reviewed the patch and it seems fine, here's my ACK > > > > Acked-by: Shlomo Pongratz > > > Hi Shlomo, Thank you for reviewing my patch. -- Kleber Sacilotto de Souza IBM Linux Technology Center