[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6E21E5352C11B742B20C142EB499E0480813DAF6@TK5EX14MBXC122.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 19:58:50 +0000
From: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"gregkh@...e.de" <gregkh@...e.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
"virtualization@...ts.osdl.org" <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>,
"Haiyang Zhang" <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
"Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD)"
<v-abkane@...rosoft.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 24/49] Staging: hv: vmbus: Get rid of the unused wrapper
- vmbus_onchannel_event()
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@...ah.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 2:59 PM
> To: KY Srinivasan
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig; gregkh@...e.de; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> devel@...uxdriverproject.org; virtualization@...ts.osdl.org; Haiyang Zhang;
> Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD)
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/49] Staging: hv: vmbus: Get rid of the unused wrapper -
> vmbus_onchannel_event()
>
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 02:59:32PM +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:hch@...radead.org]
> > > Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 7:15 PM
> > > To: KY Srinivasan
> > > Cc: gregkh@...e.de; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> > > devel@...uxdriverproject.org; virtualization@...ts.osdl.org; Haiyang Zhang;
> > > Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD)
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/49] Staging: hv: vmbus: Get rid of the unused wrapper
> -
> > > vmbus_onchannel_event()
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 03:49:48PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> > > > Now, get rid of the unused wrapper - vmbus_onchannel_event().
> > >
> > > I'd merge this into the previous patch. In general your patch split
> > > seem a little too fine grained to me in general. When you remove a
> > > wrapper you can inline it into the callsite directly, if you clean up a
> > > function directly inlining it into the helper is fine, etc.
> > >
> > I agree with you that some of these patches are too fine grained; but
> > I thought that was what was expected - "one change per patch".
>
> Yes, but don't take it to an extreme, like you have done here :)
Will do in the future. Should I re-spin any of the patches in this set to make them less
"fine-grained".
Regards,
K. Y
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists