From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B631FC433E3 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F50B20714 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=crudebyte.com header.i=@crudebyte.com header.b="Wn3WKLeA" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7F50B20714 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=crudebyte.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:41684 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k0M0j-0008JK-ND for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 05:35:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37508) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k0M03-0007Qd-Cs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 05:34:19 -0400 Received: from lizzy.crudebyte.com ([91.194.90.13]:35905) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k0M00-0002AA-BN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 05:34:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=crudebyte.com; s=lizzy; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From: Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=ZK2baikIxFUth6O+ZE0Jhwc0q+XRqMZKUrH1RwXVGfc=; b=Wn3WKLeA0LW7BAIdKjXCJIgf5A u8OSQaX83a6ELbV59t+40YzEc5p6YMIEDUcxQ9P8MgXBkiTigoHowyblBerL3vIcbipHijtVyOwvx NuA0po2dmxj0ritJEthV/ZE0zB3GKEBOm+xvTJrlG16I1NK3n7/E4IJOuOnLVhcdW77ioKU67iY32 rkqe1jaeYoZ41x15OOO3Jjay0HmiTMJ7+0Q8QlLpo6NHTh1xCorEv0fmFO3TRUuo9KLCzxy8IbsDJ q3kptTNw2O+mk7zDk8wQR6YDtarsRk0VA8DUD6GbXRJgRURPbxYaXmNAe0cwoFLvfAO8EXIC0y7Ez 3/LtkqNg==; From: Christian Schoenebeck To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Greg Kurz Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/6] 9pfs: add new function v9fs_co_readdir_many() Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 11:34:12 +0200 Message-ID: <8722268.CRvGb0V2lm@silver> In-Reply-To: <20200728104600.4552a126@bahia.lan> References: <1626524.GXyn7ySoG3@silver> <20200728104600.4552a126@bahia.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=91.194.90.13; envelope-from=qemu_oss@crudebyte.com; helo=lizzy.crudebyte.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/07/28 04:33:46 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Dienstag, 28. Juli 2020 10:46:00 CEST Greg Kurz wrote: > > So I'll prepare a v8 with this patch here split into two. > > > > But this is it. I don't see another chunk in this patch set that could be > > split further down in an useful way. > > > > Best regards, > > Christian Schoenebeck > > You're in charge now so feel free to do that if the development+testing > cost is acceptable to you. Yep, that's the plan. This patch set is already thoroughly tested by me, so I would like to avoid major changes for this series now that would require me to restart major testing cycles. In this particular case, this patch-split ends up in 100% identical code. So it is really just git history tweaking after all. > You already know my take on having smaller > patches :) A pure desire for something is one thing, the actually available real-life options are another thing. If you see more options than I can identify, you are always invited to make your call. Plus this patch series already contain trivial patches for a long time (e.g. patch 1, 2, 6), and yet I haven't seen any ack from your side for any of them. Be invited for that as well. Best regards, Christian Schoenebeck