From: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
To: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, "gregkh@suse.de" <gregkh@suse.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@lists.osdl.org" <virtualization@lists.osdl.org>,
"devel@linuxdriverproject.org" <devel@linuxdriverproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Staging: hv: Unify hyper-v device abstractions
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 09:35:02 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110302063502.GD18043@bicker> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6E21E5352C11B742B20C142EB499E0480165E6@TK5EX14MBXC128.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
The problem is that everyone reading [patch 1/6] thinks you're renaming
hv_device to vm_device or introducing a new struct vm_device. That
makes people annoyed. If you had written the patch description like this:
In the original code, the structs vm_device included a struct
hv_device. This patch moves the members from hv_device directly
into struct vm_device.
The members ->dev_type and ->dev_instance from hv_device were
the same as ->class_id and ->device_id in vm_device so those
were not copied over.
Now that everything is included into vm_device directly,
hv_device is unused and we can delete the definition.
There still might be issues with the patch, but at least you would be
talking about the same thing.
regards,
dan carpenter
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-02 6:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-26 2:05 [PATCH 1/6] Staging: hv: Unify hyper-v device abstractions K. Y. Srinivasan
2011-02-26 3:21 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-02-26 17:13 ` KY Srinivasan
2011-02-26 17:13 ` KY Srinivasan
2011-03-01 2:28 ` Greg KH
2011-03-01 2:34 ` Greg KH
2011-03-02 1:40 ` KY Srinivasan
2011-03-02 6:35 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110302063502.GD18043@bicker \
--to=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=devel@linuxdriverproject.org \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=kys@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).