linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 0/4] [SCSI] ufs: Adds glue drivers to ufshcd

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:22:23 +0000
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Cc:	Vinayak Holikatti <vinholikatti@...il.com>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	patches@...aro.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	santoshsy@...il.com, arnd@...aro.org,
	girish.shivananjappa@...aro.org, saugata.das@...aro.org,
	vishak.g@...sung.com, venkat@...aro.org, k.rajesh@...sung.com,
	dsaxena@...aro.org, ilho215.lee@...sung.com, nala.la@...sung.com,
	sreekumar.c@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/4] [SCSI] ufs: Adds glue drivers to ufshcd

On Monday 16 July 2012, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-07-13 at 15:45 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Friday 13 July 2012, Vinayak Holikatti wrote:
> > > This patch set adds following features
> > >  - Seprates PCI specific code from ufshcd.c to make it as core
> > >  - Adds PCI glue driver ufshcd-pci.c
> > >  - Adds Platform glue driver ufshcd-pltfrm.c
> > >  - Update correct transfer size in Command UPIU
> > 
> > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> 
> I need a maintainer ack for this to go upstream.
> 
> Also, looking at this, I think this patch series isn't bisectable:
> Patch 1 removes PCI support and patch 2 adds it back in a different
> form.  However, any PCI based UFS system would stop working if the
> bisect landed at patch 1.  I think you can fix this just by combining
> patches 1 and 2.

I suggested to split the patch in two in a private review that we
did on the linaro mailing list. I gave my Ack because the split
was done, but I failed to notice that it was done differently
from what I suggested in 

On Monday 02 July 2012, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> I would recommend that you split this patch into two separate
> changesets, where you do all the changes to existing code in the
> first patch, and only move but don't change code in the second one
> that creates the new file.

I agree that breaking bisectibility by ripping out the PCI code
first is not good. The version 2 is not actually easier to review
at all than the first version, it just splits the changes by
file, which is pointless.

	Arnd

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/