[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1337769731.3666.8.camel@fourier.local.igalia.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:42:11 +0200
From: Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez
<siglesias@...lia.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Staging: ipack: fix failure registering an ipack
device
On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 13:41 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:13:14AM +0200, Samuel Iglesias Gonsalvez wrote:
> > Trying to install an ipack device it always failed in the match() function. This
> > patch fixes all the bugs present there.
> >
>
> This looks like part of it is undoing stuff introduced in
> [patch 1/3]? I was going to ask what the stuff was in 1/3 and then
> it got removed which makes me wonder why even more. Could you write
> something about why in your changelog? Or if it's not needed then
> remove it from the first patch.
>
> Really it would be easier to review if you broke it up into one
> patch per bug, with a description of what the bugs were instead of
> "patch fixes all the bugs present there".
>
> Some of these changes don't seem necessary. It feels like you were
> debugging and then when you got match() to work you just committed
> all the changes instead of only the lines which are needed.
>
Yes, you are right. I will work again on these patches.
Thanks,
Sam
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists