From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH] sh_eth: merge sh_eth_free_dma_buffer() into sh_eth_ring_free() Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 20:19:17 +0300 Message-ID: <563B8F95.9000507@cogentembedded.com> References: <6672379.kyQ5eFYq8y@wasted.cogentembedded.com> <20151104.205939.1680085474215420643.davem@davemloft.net> <563B5144.8050800@cogentembedded.com> <20151105.111348.1315362570048541764.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151105.111348.1315362570048541764.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Hello. On 11/05/2015 07:13 PM, David Miller wrote: >>>> While the ring allocation is done by a single function, >>>> sh_eth_ring_init(), >>>> the ring deallocation was split into two functions (almost always >>>> called >>>> one after the other) for no good reason. Merge >>>> sh_eth_free_dma_buffer() >>>> into sh_eth_ring_free() which allows us to save space not only on the >>>> direct calls of the former function but also on the >>>> sh_eth_ring_init()'s >>>> simplified error path... >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov >>> >>> Applied. >> >> Hum, I'm seeing both patches in the net.git repo, while they were >> clearly targeted to net-next.git... Did you really consider these 2 >> patches fixes? > > It was more work for me to let the patches rot in patchwork until I openned > net-next back up than to simply just apply them to net. OK, thank you! > You guys really make an enormous amount of work and stress for me when you > submit net-next patches when I _CLEARLY_ and _EXPLICITLY_ state that the > tree is closed right now. Hmm, I hadn't seen your announcement, else I would have refrained from sending. Will look for it now... MBR, Sergei